Southampton pub The Hobbit in battle with Hollywood studio

Southampton pub The Hobbit has been caught up in a legal face-off with a massive multi-national American company.

The David and Goliath-style battle could mean the popular watering hole has to change its name and theme entirely. The legal row has been described by regulars as “like hobbits versus orcs” – a
famous scene from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

The landlady says she has been told to remove all references to author JRR Tolkien’s creations, and the subsequent smash-hit films made about them – or face legal action.

The name of the pub, the website, interior and exterior artwork and the fonts it uses for promotions could have to go. Even the pub’s popular Lord of the Rings themed cocktails – named after
characters such as Frodo and Gandalf – face being scrapped.

The pub, which has been trading in Bevois Valley Road under the name The Hobbit for more than 20 years, says it is being threatened with legal action by the Saul Zaentz Company.

The California-based company is owned by US movie producer Saul Zaentz, who made Oscar winners The English Patient and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.

Promoted stories

He owns the worldwide film, stage and merchandising rights to The Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit.

The Lord of the Rings movies, which star Elijah Wood as hobbit Frodo, are among the most successful in history and the follow-up film The Hobbit is due out at the end of this year.

Last night pub landlady Stella Roberts, 41, said her small business did not have the funds to stand up to the Hollywood giant.

They have been given a deadline of the end of May to change the pub’s theme – or legal action will be taken for copyright infringement.

She said: “We just haven’t got the resources to fight it. How can I take on a multi-million pound power?

“It’s all in the hands of the solicitors at the moment – we are just stunned.

“It’s not just a case of changing the name – it’s all the merchandise, artwork, absolutely everything. We never planned to steal anybody else’s ideas – we’re all such huge fans of Tolkien that it’s
more like a homage.”

Pub regular, Ann-Marie O’Halloran- Woodford, 32, from Midanbury, said the pub was unique. She added: “I think it’s very symptomatic of the little guy verses the big guys – people who have the money
have all the rights and that’s the way the system works. It’s like hobbits verses orcs.”

Heather Cartwright, who set up the Internet campaign, says she would be devastated if the pub had to change its theme: “Part of the fun of The Hobbit is its theme. I can’t think of any other pub
where I’ve walked past a Ringwraith, or had the pleasure of being able to say: ‘I’ll have a Gandalf, please’.

“It’s a homage to Tolkien’s work, not someone just selfishly trying to capitalise off it.”

In November, a Birmingham cafe called the Hungry Hobbit was also accused of copyright infringement by lawyers representing SZC.

The cafe was told to “phase out” the use of the name on menus, websites and signs.

Share article

The Daily Echo attempted to contact both SZC and Edward Wildman Group solicitors, who are acting on behalf of the company, but no one was available to comment.

• Reporter Bethan Phillips will be at The Hobbit at 4pm today to collect the views of regulars. Please come down to have your say.

Promoted Stories

Comments (158)

I worked at the Hobbit in the early 1990s. It's an established part of southampton's pub DNA. Surely the owner can argue demonstrable "no harm", which is the usual defense against copyright infringement involving long-standing naming rights issues.

I worked at the Hobbit in the early 1990s. It's an established part of southampton's pub DNA. Surely the owner can argue demonstrable "no harm", which is the usual defense against copyright infringement involving long-standing naming rights issues.City Saint

I worked at the Hobbit in the early 1990s. It's an established part of southampton's pub DNA. Surely the owner can argue demonstrable "no harm", which is the usual defense against copyright infringement involving long-standing naming rights issues.

Score: 0

sherinsul says...7:24am Tue 13 Mar 12

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculoussherinsul

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

Score: 0

nedscrumpo says...7:27am Tue 13 Mar 12

change the name to THE HOB BIT

change the name to THE HOB BITnedscrumpo

change the name to THE HOB BIT

Score: 0

waggers5 says...7:41am Tue 13 Mar 12

This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.

This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.waggers5

This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.

Score: 0

Totton Ric says...7:46am Tue 13 Mar 12

Typical Yanks, as somebody has already said the Hobbit has been there longer than the Film when made. I do believe back in the late 90s The Romsey Old Boys had to stop using certain costumes as Walt Disney said they would sue ! That’s them all over, World domination on everything !

Typical Yanks, as somebody has already said the Hobbit has been there longer than the Film when made. I do believe back in the late 90s The Romsey Old Boys had to stop using certain costumes as Walt Disney said they would sue ! That’s them all over, World domination on everything !Totton Ric

Typical Yanks, as somebody has already said the Hobbit has been there longer than the Film when made. I do believe back in the late 90s The Romsey Old Boys had to stop using certain costumes as Walt Disney said they would sue ! That’s them all over, World domination on everything !

Score: 0

Crazywolf says...7:47am Tue 13 Mar 12

They should just change their name. to something like.. Hollywood Greed

They should just change their name.
to something like..
Hollywood GreedCrazywolf

They should just change their name. to something like.. Hollywood Greed

Score: 0

RBurns17 says...7:58am Tue 13 Mar 12

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.
When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.
The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....
Seriously people....RBurns17

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Score: 0

Essruu says...8:00am Tue 13 Mar 12

They shouldn't just change it. If they can't afford the legal bill, just self-represent. If forced to change the name, 'THE HOB BIT' is a good shout. Or 'Saul Zaentz's Tiny Penis'.

They shouldn't just change it. If they can't afford the legal bill, just self-represent.
If forced to change the name, 'THE HOB BIT' is a good shout. Or 'Saul Zaentz's Tiny Penis'.Essruu

They shouldn't just change it. If they can't afford the legal bill, just self-represent. If forced to change the name, 'THE HOB BIT' is a good shout. Or 'Saul Zaentz's Tiny Penis'.

Score: 0

CazzB says...8:00am Tue 13 Mar 12

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

I do not agree that the pub should change its name but the article says "Lawyers for a US film company are demanding the Hobbit pub scraps its name and any links to JRR Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings books. " Not films and The Hobbit was 1st published in 1937

[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]I do not agree that the pub should change its name but the article says "Lawyers for a US film company are demanding the Hobbit pub scraps its name and any links to JRR Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings books. " Not films and The Hobbit was 1st published in 1937CazzB

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

I do not agree that the pub should change its name but the article says "Lawyers for a US film company are demanding the Hobbit pub scraps its name and any links to JRR Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings books. " Not films and The Hobbit was 1st published in 1937

Score: 0

bigfella777 says...8:07am Tue 13 Mar 12

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.bigfella777

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Score: 0

10 Minute Man says...8:09am Tue 13 Mar 12

What are they frightened of? Someone will accidentally mistake a crusty old boozer in Bevois Valley, Southampton with the real thing ? A Hobbit theme park ? A Peter Jackson memorial site ? What ? Or is it the usual hamfisted shakedown by a bunch of merchandisers and their greedy lawyers ? Perhaps in exchange for a small consideration they will be allowed to retain the name.... Of course this is nothing compared to ACTA, the secret worldwide copyright treaty that CallMeDave, SpinelessNick, and before them Ol'OneEye are signing our country up to without so much as a glance at the electorate.

What are they frightened of? Someone will accidentally mistake a crusty old boozer in Bevois Valley, Southampton with the real thing ? A Hobbit theme park ? A Peter Jackson memorial site ? What ?
Or is it the usual hamfisted shakedown by a bunch of merchandisers and their greedy lawyers ? Perhaps in exchange for a small consideration they will be allowed to retain the name....
Of course this is nothing compared to ACTA, the secret worldwide copyright treaty that CallMeDave, SpinelessNick, and before them Ol'OneEye are signing our country up to without so much as a glance at the electorate.10 Minute Man

What are they frightened of? Someone will accidentally mistake a crusty old boozer in Bevois Valley, Southampton with the real thing ? A Hobbit theme park ? A Peter Jackson memorial site ? What ? Or is it the usual hamfisted shakedown by a bunch of merchandisers and their greedy lawyers ? Perhaps in exchange for a small consideration they will be allowed to retain the name.... Of course this is nothing compared to ACTA, the secret worldwide copyright treaty that CallMeDave, SpinelessNick, and before them Ol'OneEye are signing our country up to without so much as a glance at the electorate.

Score: 0

bids says...8:22am Tue 13 Mar 12

just change it back to the real name ports-wood hotel (:

just change it back to the real name ports-wood hotel (:bids

just change it back to the real name ports-wood hotel (:

Score: 0

userds5050 says...8:24am Tue 13 Mar 12

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Yes, most people do realise The Hobbit is based on a book. You're right about the promo stuff though. They had stuff like Gandalf cocktails on sale when I went in there once.

[quote][p][bold]RBurns17[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.
When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.
The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....
Seriously people....[/p][/quote]Yes, most people do realise The Hobbit is based on a book. You're right about the promo stuff though. They had stuff like Gandalf cocktails on sale when I went in there once.userds5050

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Yes, most people do realise The Hobbit is based on a book. You're right about the promo stuff though. They had stuff like Gandalf cocktails on sale when I went in there once.

Score: 0

Ant Smoking MP says...8:28am Tue 13 Mar 12

Maybe the Pub called The Hobbit should sue the Saul Zaentz Company for using their Pubs name for the film?

Maybe the Pub called The Hobbit should sue the Saul Zaentz Company for using their Pubs name for the film?Ant Smoking MP

Maybe the Pub called The Hobbit should sue the Saul Zaentz Company for using their Pubs name for the film?

Score: 0

Ant Smoking MP says...8:32am Tue 13 Mar 12

Wasnt the other name for the book called The Hobbit 'There and Back Again'? Now there is a possible compromise!!

Wasnt the other name for the book called The Hobbit 'There and Back Again'? Now there is a possible compromise!!Ant Smoking MP

Wasnt the other name for the book called The Hobbit 'There and Back Again'? Now there is a possible compromise!!

Score: 0

a and e says...8:39am Tue 13 Mar 12

a great name would be the space cadet or the dump.

a great name would be the space cadet or the dump.a and e

a great name would be the space cadet or the dump.

Score: 0

Pixiienot says...8:46am Tue 13 Mar 12

What a load of rubbish.. I hardly think a small student bar in Southampton poses any threat! Its like the inventor of dominoes threatening dominoes pizza?! Get a life.

What a load of rubbish.. I hardly think a small student bar in Southampton poses any threat! Its like the inventor of dominoes threatening dominoes pizza?! Get a life.Pixiienot

What a load of rubbish.. I hardly think a small student bar in Southampton poses any threat! Its like the inventor of dominoes threatening dominoes pizza?! Get a life.

Score: 0

Icklelady says...8:48am Tue 13 Mar 12

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

This is just greed.
The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years.
Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around?
Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.Icklelady

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

Score: 0

Beer Monster says...8:51am Tue 13 Mar 12

It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnished

It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnishedBeer Monster

It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnished

Score: 0

Linesman says...9:01am Tue 13 Mar 12

nedscrumpo wrote…

change the name to THE HOB BIT

Or tell Saul Zaentz to HOPPIT.

[quote][p][bold]nedscrumpo[/bold] wrote:
change the name to THE HOB BIT[/p][/quote]Or tell Saul Zaentz to HOPPIT.Linesman

nedscrumpo wrote…

change the name to THE HOB BIT

Or tell Saul Zaentz to HOPPIT.

Score: 0

loosehead says...9:05am Tue 13 Mar 12

Would the pub be willing to pay royalties on every pint sold to the owners of the trademark/copywrite ? they are making a living & branding their product under the Lord of the rings theme(Hobbit) so are exploiting this for their own good so it might be petty but the company/persons have every right to stop them. If you make a shirt with a football teams name on it & sell it as such you can be done this is no different

Would the pub be willing to pay royalties on every pint sold to the owners of the trademark/copywrite ?
they are making a living & branding their product under the Lord of the rings theme(Hobbit) so are exploiting this for their own good so it might be petty but the company/persons have every right to stop them.
If you make a shirt with a football teams name on it & sell it as such you can be done this is no differentloosehead

Would the pub be willing to pay royalties on every pint sold to the owners of the trademark/copywrite ? they are making a living & branding their product under the Lord of the rings theme(Hobbit) so are exploiting this for their own good so it might be petty but the company/persons have every right to stop them. If you make a shirt with a football teams name on it & sell it as such you can be done this is no different

Score: 0

ToastyTea says...9:25am Tue 13 Mar 12

CEH393 wrote…

Chipster wrote…

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool!

Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?

How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago). They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.

[quote][p][bold]CEH393[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chipster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RBurns17[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote: how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....[/p][/quote]Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool![/p][/quote]Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?[/p][/quote]How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago).
They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.ToastyTea

CEH393 wrote…

Chipster wrote…

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool!

Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?

How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago). They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.

Score: 0

hulla baloo says...9:28am Tue 13 Mar 12

Grow up Chipster and CEH, here is a guy who spent time researching information, and added here to be constructive to the topic. Give him credit, not insults.

Grow up Chipster and CEH, here is a guy who spent time researching information, and added here to be constructive to the topic. Give him credit, not insults.hulla baloo

Grow up Chipster and CEH, here is a guy who spent time researching information, and added here to be constructive to the topic. Give him credit, not insults.

Score: 0

The Music Man says...9:31am Tue 13 Mar 12

This has been a long time coming. They've gotten away with it for years. If it was just memorabilia it could be classed as a tribute pub.....but they've created drinks like "Gandalf", they sell t-shirts with the LOTR images on. It's more like a theme pub and they are making money of somebody else's creation. This couldn't happen to a nicer lady.

This has been a long time coming. They've gotten away with it for years. If it was just memorabilia it could be classed as a tribute pub.....but they've created drinks like "Gandalf", they sell t-shirts with the LOTR images on. It's more like a theme pub and they are making money of somebody else's creation.
This couldn't happen to a nicer lady.The Music Man

This has been a long time coming. They've gotten away with it for years. If it was just memorabilia it could be classed as a tribute pub.....but they've created drinks like "Gandalf", they sell t-shirts with the LOTR images on. It's more like a theme pub and they are making money of somebody else's creation. This couldn't happen to a nicer lady.

Score: 0

SpiderMeringue says...9:32am Tue 13 Mar 12

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.[/p][/quote]Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.SpiderMeringue

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Score: 0

userds5050 says...9:33am Tue 13 Mar 12

Reuel Tolkien, CBE ( /ˈtɒlkiːn/, US /ˈtoʊlkiːn/;[1] 3 January 1892 – 2 September 1973) was an English writer, poet, philologist, and university professor, best known as the author of the classic high fantasy works The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and The Silmarillion.

Reuel Tolkien, CBE ( /ˈtɒlkiːn/, US /ˈtoʊlkiːn/;[1] 3 January 1892 – 2 September 1973) was an English writer, poet, philologist, and university professor, best known as the author of the classic high fantasy works The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and The Silmarillion.userds5050

Reuel Tolkien, CBE ( /ˈtɒlkiːn/, US /ˈtoʊlkiːn/;[1] 3 January 1892 – 2 September 1973) was an English writer, poet, philologist, and university professor, best known as the author of the classic high fantasy works The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, and The Silmarillion.

Score: 0

Shoong says...9:34am Tue 13 Mar 12

Sorry, but they've been trading off someone else's creativity & the Tolkien family estate for many years, just laws are in place to ensure you don't encroach on copyrights. They must have known this would come one day.

Sorry, but they've been trading off someone else's creativity & the Tolkien family estate for many years, just laws are in place to ensure you don't encroach on copyrights.
They must have known this would come one day.Shoong

Sorry, but they've been trading off someone else's creativity & the Tolkien family estate for many years, just laws are in place to ensure you don't encroach on copyrights. They must have known this would come one day.

Score: 0

ajw1986 says...9:37am Tue 13 Mar 12

Possibly the most rediculous thing ever. Why should they be even bothered about a pub in Southampton? Thats stupid.

Possibly the most rediculous thing ever. Why should they be even bothered about a pub in Southampton? Thats stupid.ajw1986

Possibly the most rediculous thing ever. Why should they be even bothered about a pub in Southampton? Thats stupid.

Score: 0

YankeeDoodle says...9:41am Tue 13 Mar 12

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.YankeeDoodle

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...9:42am Tue 13 Mar 12

I write under another name and royalties etc pay my living. Its hardwork writing etc without people trying to make money for free. No one is going to pay for royalty usage if this pub continues to use the Hobbit freely If this went ahead unchecked thousands would jump on the band wagon.

I write under another name and royalties etc pay my living. Its hardwork writing etc without people trying to make money for free.
No one is going to pay for royalty usage if this pub continues to use the Hobbit freely
If this went ahead unchecked thousands would jump on the band wagon.voiceinthecrowd

I write under another name and royalties etc pay my living. Its hardwork writing etc without people trying to make money for free. No one is going to pay for royalty usage if this pub continues to use the Hobbit freely If this went ahead unchecked thousands would jump on the band wagon.

Score: 0

abees says...9:44am Tue 13 Mar 12

Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one: http://sotontab.co.u k/news/2012/03/09/ho bbit-under-siege-fro m-tolkiens-orc-lawye rs/

Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one:
http://sotontab.co.u
k/news/2012/03/09/ho
bbit-under-siege-fro
m-tolkiens-orc-lawye
rs/abees

Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one: http://sotontab.co.u k/news/2012/03/09/ho bbit-under-siege-fro m-tolkiens-orc-lawye rs/

Score: 0

aberis says...9:55am Tue 13 Mar 12

ToastyTea wrote…

CEH393 wrote…

Chipster wrote…

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool!

Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?

How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago). They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.

I first started going to this pub while I was doing my apprenticeship (88-92). I can't remember it the time whether they said it was named in Tolkien's (died 1973) memory or simply because they liked the books; however as Tolkien had lived in, and died, the Bournemouth area they had written to the Tolkien estate to ask permission to use the name. They certainly hadn't bought the rights to use the name; however I believe they were told that due to the locality of Tolkien's home, they would allow the name to be used. I appreciate that I doubt it would have covered the use of the movie images for promotion etc.; however if the use of the name was allowed, provided the promotional usage stops, there would be no reason for the pub not to keep it's name.

[quote][p][bold]ToastyTea[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]CEH393[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chipster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RBurns17[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote: how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....[/p][/quote]Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool![/p][/quote]Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?[/p][/quote]How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago).
They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.[/p][/quote]I first started going to this pub while I was doing my apprenticeship (88-92). I can't remember it the time whether they said it was named in Tolkien's (died 1973) memory or simply because they liked the books; however as Tolkien had lived in, and died, the Bournemouth area they had written to the Tolkien estate to ask permission to use the name. They certainly hadn't bought the rights to use the name; however I believe they were told that due to the locality of Tolkien's home, they would allow the name to be used.
I appreciate that I doubt it would have covered the use of the movie images for promotion etc.; however if the use of the name was allowed, provided the promotional usage stops, there would be no reason for the pub not to keep it's name.aberis

ToastyTea wrote…

CEH393 wrote…

Chipster wrote…

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Seriously, get out more and get a ****ing life you pompous tool!

Well put Chipster, what a complete fool this man is! I wonder how long it took him to find out all of his info on google and wiki?

How is he a fool, he's right. When this story came about I did think I can't imagine they have bought the rights off the Tolkien estate to be able to name the pub 'The Hobbit' (even if it was 20yrs ago). They are more then within their right to make the pub rename (however harsh it maybe), I'm surprised it hasn't come about sooner actually.

I first started going to this pub while I was doing my apprenticeship (88-92). I can't remember it the time whether they said it was named in Tolkien's (died 1973) memory or simply because they liked the books; however as Tolkien had lived in, and died, the Bournemouth area they had written to the Tolkien estate to ask permission to use the name. They certainly hadn't bought the rights to use the name; however I believe they were told that due to the locality of Tolkien's home, they would allow the name to be used. I appreciate that I doubt it would have covered the use of the movie images for promotion etc.; however if the use of the name was allowed, provided the promotional usage stops, there would be no reason for the pub not to keep it's name.

Score: 0

TheTruthIknow says...9:57am Tue 13 Mar 12

YankeeDoodle wrote…

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etc

[quote][p][bold]YankeeDoodle[/bold] wrote:
They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.[/p][/quote]They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etcTheTruthIknow

YankeeDoodle wrote…

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etc

Score: 0

pushamara says...10:10am Tue 13 Mar 12

Oh, just close it and build some flats............... .....

Oh, just close it and build some flats...............
.....pushamara

Oh, just close it and build some flats............... .....

Score: 0

Icklelady says...10:11am Tue 13 Mar 12

TheTruthIknow wrote…

YankeeDoodle wrote…

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etc

Then just rename drinks and stop the shirt selling?

[quote][p][bold]TheTruthIknow[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]YankeeDoodle[/bold] wrote:
They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.[/p][/quote]They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etc[/p][/quote]Then just rename drinks and stop the shirt selling?Icklelady

TheTruthIknow wrote…

YankeeDoodle wrote…

They should see how the Hungry Hobbit sandwich shop in Birmingham got to keep its name when faced with the same legal team. LOL, its across the way from The Shire greenbelt if you want to find it.

They were just up the road from where JRR Tolkien grew up....and they weren't selling themed drinks, t-shirts etc

Then just rename drinks and stop the shirt selling?

Score: 0

Dan Kerins says...10:13am Tue 13 Mar 12

abees wrote…

Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one: http://sotontab.co.u k/news/2012/03/09/ho bbit-under-siege-fro m-tolkiens-orc-lawye rs/

It takes time to try and get hold of legal firms in America, which we are required to do so to give them a right of reply, I'm afraid. It is not just a case of sticking up scant information without having to carry out a number of checks and balances first, which we are legally required to do.

[quote][p][bold]abees[/bold] wrote:
Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one:
http://sotontab.co.u
k/news/2012/03/09/ho
bbit-under-siege-fro
m-tolkiens-orc-lawye
rs/[/p][/quote]It takes time to try and get hold of legal firms in America, which we are required to do so to give them a right of reply, I'm afraid.
It is not just a case of sticking up scant information without having to carry out a number of checks and balances first, which we are legally required to do.Dan Kerins

abees wrote…

Don't worry Echo, you're only FOUR days behind on this one: http://sotontab.co.u k/news/2012/03/09/ho bbit-under-siege-fro m-tolkiens-orc-lawye rs/

It takes time to try and get hold of legal firms in America, which we are required to do so to give them a right of reply, I'm afraid. It is not just a case of sticking up scant information without having to carry out a number of checks and balances first, which we are legally required to do.

Score: 0

Shoong says...10:23am Tue 13 Mar 12

I'm flabbergasted by comments like 'it was there before the films'. The book was written last century... some of you need some culture down you.

I'm flabbergasted by comments like 'it was there before the films'.
The book was written last century... some of you need some culture down you.Shoong

I'm flabbergasted by comments like 'it was there before the films'. The book was written last century... some of you need some culture down you.

Score: 0

southy says...10:26am Tue 13 Mar 12

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hobbyist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hobbyist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.southy

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hobbyist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

Score: 0

allsaintsnocurves says...10:38am Tue 13 Mar 12

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.allsaintsnocurves

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

Score: 0

Willy+ says...10:43am Tue 13 Mar 12

what harm is this charming pub and music house doing

what harm is this charming pub and music house doingWilly+

what harm is this charming pub and music house doing

Score: 0

aberis says...10:43am Tue 13 Mar 12

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

[quote][p][bold]Icklelady[/bold] wrote:
This is just greed.
The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years.
Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around?
Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.[/p][/quote]The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name.
The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.aberis

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

Score: 0

TheTruthIknow says...10:45am Tue 13 Mar 12

allsaintsnocurves wrote…

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

It's actually called Hobbit House and it does indeed employ 'little people' but it does not make money from selling merchandise with images/names from the original book (unlike our own Hobbit)

[quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote:
There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.[/p][/quote]It's actually called Hobbit House and it does indeed employ 'little people' but it does not make money from selling merchandise with images/names from the original book (unlike our own Hobbit)TheTruthIknow

allsaintsnocurves wrote…

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

It's actually called Hobbit House and it does indeed employ 'little people' but it does not make money from selling merchandise with images/names from the original book (unlike our own Hobbit)

Score: 0

Bally_Hoo says...10:49am Tue 13 Mar 12

Sounds like a publicity stunt to me. Drum a bit of outrage and encourage more punters.

Sounds like a publicity stunt to me. Drum a bit of outrage and encourage more punters.Bally_Hoo

Sounds like a publicity stunt to me. Drum a bit of outrage and encourage more punters.

Score: 0

Shoong says...10:55am Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.Shoong

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

Score: 0

southy says...11:07am Tue 13 Mar 12

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Icklelady[/bold] wrote:
This is just greed.
The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years.
Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around?
Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.[/p][/quote]The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name.
The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.[/p][/quote]More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.southy

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

Score: 0

redarmy5 says...11:09am Tue 13 Mar 12

Stupid question but how did the yanks know about this pub considering its been the hobbit for bloody years.

Stupid question but how did the yanks know about this pub considering its been the hobbit for bloody years.redarmy5

Stupid question but how did the yanks know about this pub considering its been the hobbit for bloody years.

Score: 0

acid drop says...11:12am Tue 13 Mar 12

The American compensation culture strikes again.

The American compensation culture strikes again.acid drop

The American compensation culture strikes again.

Score: 0

mrtein says...11:13am Tue 13 Mar 12

I recall some years back there was a charity band in Romsey that used to parade at the carnival and the like dressed in winnie the pooh costumes while playing their instruments. low and behold Disney found out and came down on them like a ton of bricks. Legally, if you dont protect your copy right in every case you relinquish your rights to it. The rights to Lord of the rings are so lucrative that aint gonna happen. Much better for them to use the publicity to fond a new name and get some serious free advertising.

I recall some years back there was a charity band in Romsey that used to parade at the carnival and the like dressed in winnie the pooh costumes while playing their instruments. low and behold Disney found out and came down on them like a ton of bricks. Legally, if you dont protect your copy right in every case you relinquish your rights to it. The rights to Lord of the rings are so lucrative that aint gonna happen. Much better for them to use the publicity to fond a new name and get some serious free advertising.mrtein

I recall some years back there was a charity band in Romsey that used to parade at the carnival and the like dressed in winnie the pooh costumes while playing their instruments. low and behold Disney found out and came down on them like a ton of bricks. Legally, if you dont protect your copy right in every case you relinquish your rights to it. The rights to Lord of the rings are so lucrative that aint gonna happen. Much better for them to use the publicity to fond a new name and get some serious free advertising.

Score: 0

cyber_fug says...11:14am Tue 13 Mar 12

OMG ! I agree with Southy.... I am glad to see Dan Kerrins posting as I was worried he'd been arrested for hacking FMG's phone :O)

OMG ! I agree with Southy....
I am glad to see Dan Kerrins posting as I was worried he'd been arrested for hacking FMG's phone :O)cyber_fug

OMG ! I agree with Southy.... I am glad to see Dan Kerrins posting as I was worried he'd been arrested for hacking FMG's phone :O)

Score: 0

southy says...11:14am Tue 13 Mar 12

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.southy

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

Score: 0

AM says...11:19am Tue 13 Mar 12

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du dmen,hell-hounds,dop ple-gangers,bogglebo es,bogies,redmen,por tunes,grants and hobbits...' J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published. Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du
dmen,hell-hounds,dop
ple-gangers,bogglebo
es,bogies,redmen,por
tunes,grants and hobbits...'
J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published.
Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.AM

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du dmen,hell-hounds,dop ple-gangers,bogglebo es,bogies,redmen,por tunes,grants and hobbits...' J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published. Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

Score: 0

AM says...11:19am Tue 13 Mar 12

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du dmen,hell-hounds,dop ple-gangers,bogglebo es,bogies,redmen,por tunes,grants and hobbits...' J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published. Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du
dmen,hell-hounds,dop
ple-gangers,bogglebo
es,bogies,redmen,por
tunes,grants and hobbits...'
J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published.
Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.AM

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du dmen,hell-hounds,dop ple-gangers,bogglebo es,bogies,redmen,por tunes,grants and hobbits...' J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published. Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

Score: 0

southy says...11:23am Tue 13 Mar 12

Heres another point also, Saul Zaentz Company has not put a copy right on design on the Word Hobbit. Like the word Kelloggs it don't have a copy right on the word but it do have a copy right on the design of the word.

Heres another point also, Saul Zaentz Company has not put a copy right on design on the Word Hobbit. Like the word Kelloggs it don't have a copy right on the word but it do have a copy right on the design of the word.southy

Heres another point also, Saul Zaentz Company has not put a copy right on design on the Word Hobbit. Like the word Kelloggs it don't have a copy right on the word but it do have a copy right on the design of the word.

Score: 0

The Music Man says...11:27am Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.The Music Man

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.

Score: 0

bigfella777 says...11:27am Tue 13 Mar 12

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

[quote][p][bold]SpiderMeringue[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.[/p][/quote]Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.[/p][/quote]Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.bigfella777

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

Score: 0

Shoong says...11:31am Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

It's THE Hobbit. As in the title of a book they used. It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of!

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.[/p][/quote]It's THE Hobbit.
As in the title of a book they used.
It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of!Shoong

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

It's THE Hobbit. As in the title of a book they used. It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of!

Score: 0

southy says...11:35am Tue 13 Mar 12

AM wrote…

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du dmen,hell-hounds,dop ple-gangers,bogglebo es,bogies,redmen,por tunes,grants and hobbits...' J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published. Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

Now go back to Shakespeare, You find the word Hobbit was use here to discribe a prop that was used on stage, (modern day term for this prop is hobby-horse) but the word go's back even earlier, it was a traveling Trades man who use to walk to towns and villages ect with donkey or pony carrying his tools of his trade.

[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du
dmen,hell-hounds,dop
ple-gangers,bogglebo
es,bogies,redmen,por
tunes,grants and hobbits...'
J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published.
Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.[/p][/quote]Now go back to Shakespeare, You find the word Hobbit was use here to discribe a prop that was used on stage, (modern day term for this prop is hobby-horse) but the word go's back even earlier, it was a traveling Trades man who use to walk to towns and villages ect with donkey or pony carrying his tools of his trade.southy

AM wrote…

It may interest the Landlady of The Hobbit to know that the term hobbit was first mentioned in a list of supernatural beings by the folklorist Michael Aislabie Denham in 1895. I quote "nixies, jinny-burnt-tails,du dmen,hell-hounds,dop ple-gangers,bogglebo es,bogies,redmen,por tunes,grants and hobbits...' J.R.R. Tolkien most probably took the word hobbit from this list and therefore it is a possibility that the term does not belong to the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien especially as Tolkien was born in 1892 and would only have been 3 years old when the list was published. Stand your ground the Americans are having far too much say in Great Britain.

Now go back to Shakespeare, You find the word Hobbit was use here to discribe a prop that was used on stage, (modern day term for this prop is hobby-horse) but the word go's back even earlier, it was a traveling Trades man who use to walk to towns and villages ect with donkey or pony carrying his tools of his trade.

Score: 0

southy says...11:45am Tue 13 Mar 12

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

It's THE Hobbit. As in the title of a book they used. It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of!

Its not the end off meaning of the word "The" (used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article a or an ) Pubs names mostlly begin with the word "The, THE" The Ship Inn, THE SAINTS and again the word The and THE can not be copy righted only the design of the Letters in the word and it must be an idividual design that as never been used before, Like Kellogg's Cornflakes the copy right is NOT THE WORD but the design of the word.

[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.[/p][/quote]It's THE Hobbit.
As in the title of a book they used.
It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of![/p][/quote]Its not the end off meaning of the word "The" (used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article a or an )
Pubs names mostlly begin with the word "The, THE" The Ship Inn, THE SAINTS and again the word The and THE can not be copy righted only the design of the Letters in the word and it must be an idividual design that as never been used before, Like Kellogg's Cornflakes the copy right is NOT THE WORD but the design of the word.southy

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

It's THE Hobbit. As in the title of a book they used. It's nothing to do with 'Old English', they've been ripping off the title of a book. End of!

Its not the end off meaning of the word "The" (used, especially before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the indefinite article a or an ) Pubs names mostlly begin with the word "The, THE" The Ship Inn, THE SAINTS and again the word The and THE can not be copy righted only the design of the Letters in the word and it must be an idividual design that as never been used before, Like Kellogg's Cornflakes the copy right is NOT THE WORD but the design of the word.

Score: 0

AM says...11:46am Tue 13 Mar 12

Absolutely right. It's a very old country term handed down through the generations verbally. Not only that it will mean slightly different things in different regions of Britain. In Shakespeare it's an hobby-horse, to Denham a supernatural being. It would be interesting to hear other meanings. What is right though is that the word cannot be owned by the film company or by the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien as it existed before the book.

Absolutely right. It's a very old country term handed down through the generations verbally. Not only that it will mean slightly different things in different regions of Britain. In Shakespeare it's an hobby-horse, to Denham a supernatural being. It would be interesting to hear other meanings. What is right though is that the word cannot be owned by the film company or by the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien as it existed before the book.AM

Absolutely right. It's a very old country term handed down through the generations verbally. Not only that it will mean slightly different things in different regions of Britain. In Shakespeare it's an hobby-horse, to Denham a supernatural being. It would be interesting to hear other meanings. What is right though is that the word cannot be owned by the film company or by the estate of J.R.R. Tolkien as it existed before the book.

Score: 0

southy says...11:50am Tue 13 Mar 12

The Music Man wrote…

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.

Then you come back to the problem that they have been doing so way before Saul Zaentz Company ever registered it as copy rights, and they still will have massive problems because Tolkien used real names of people, and real names off places and again comes to that problem can not be copy righted

[quote][p][bold]The Music Man[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign.
I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted.
So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.[/p][/quote]The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.[/p][/quote]Then you come back to the problem that they have been doing so way before Saul Zaentz Company ever registered it as copy rights, and they still will have massive problems because Tolkien used real names of people, and real names off places and again comes to that problem can not be copy rightedsouthy

The Music Man wrote…

southy wrote…

Shoong wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

That's irrelevant though isn't it? It's not called the 'Hobbist' or 'Hobbism', it's called 'The Hobbit' & so blatant that they even have characters from the books on the pub sign. I'm afraid it's the pub owners on the sticky ground.

The fact remains that a Hobbit is an old english word and can not legally be copy righted. So its the Saul Zaentz Company on Sticky ground, and has its been pointed out they can not make legal claims on any thing that happen before the date they Registered the Copy right.

The fact remains that The Hobbit have been using characters/names from the book to make money by selling merch/drinks.

Then you come back to the problem that they have been doing so way before Saul Zaentz Company ever registered it as copy rights, and they still will have massive problems because Tolkien used real names of people, and real names off places and again comes to that problem can not be copy righted

Score: 0

mack chinnon says...11:54am Tue 13 Mar 12

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]Turn it into a Hooters.mack chinnon

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Score: 0

teamgreen says...12:01pm Tue 13 Mar 12

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

yes turn it into a hooters bar please

[quote][p][bold]mack chinnon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote: All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]Turn it into a Hooters.[/p][/quote]yes turn it into a hooters bar pleaseteamgreen

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

yes turn it into a hooters bar please

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...12:05pm Tue 13 Mar 12

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

[quote][p][bold]mack chinnon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]Turn it into a Hooters.[/p][/quote]Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks.
There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.voiceinthecrowd

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

Score: 0

southy says...12:09pm Tue 13 Mar 12

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.southy

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

Score: 0

Dasal says...12:09pm Tue 13 Mar 12

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

No response yet, but thats VERY thin ice you're on !!! Touch of the "Victor Meldrews" ...... comments HAVE to come from "known" sources soon ........fmg maybe..............

[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]No response yet, but thats VERY thin ice you're on !!!
Touch of the "Victor Meldrews" ......
comments HAVE to come from "known" sources soon ........fmg maybe..............Dasal

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

No response yet, but thats VERY thin ice you're on !!! Touch of the "Victor Meldrews" ...... comments HAVE to come from "known" sources soon ........fmg maybe..............

Score: 0

Pixiienot says...12:19pm Tue 13 Mar 12

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.

[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.Pixiienot

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...12:21pm Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title. I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House. Most businesses don't I understand It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak. Not all films make it and money is lost. If you want films you need to think

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.[/p][/quote]You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title.
I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House.
Most businesses don't I understand
It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak.
Not all films make it and money is lost.
If you want films you need to thinkvoiceinthecrowd

southy wrote…

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title. I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House. Most businesses don't I understand It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak. Not all films make it and money is lost. If you want films you need to think

Score: 0

Paramjit Bahia says...12:26pm Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point . Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master . This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth . Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies? . Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point
.
Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master
.
This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth
.
Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies?
.
Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.Paramjit Bahia

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point . Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master . This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth . Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies? . Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.

Score: 0

Paramjit Bahia says...12:28pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Pixiienot wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.

Nice reply.

[quote][p][bold]Pixiienot[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.[/p][/quote]Nice reply.Paramjit Bahia

Pixiienot wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

What an obnoxious human being, Get back in your boxers and watch some more Jeremy Kyle.

Nice reply.

Score: 0

fedupofspongers says...12:38pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Close it down... It's full of drunken junkie students anyway... Where do they get off thinking they can STEAL a name that is copywritten and make a business out of it... It's a dive anyway and i hope the firm take a percentage of profits since under that name...

Close it down... It's full of drunken junkie students anyway...
Where do they get off thinking they can STEAL a name that is copywritten and make a business out of it...
It's a dive anyway and i hope the firm take a percentage of profits since under that name...fedupofspongers

Close it down... It's full of drunken junkie students anyway... Where do they get off thinking they can STEAL a name that is copywritten and make a business out of it... It's a dive anyway and i hope the firm take a percentage of profits since under that name...

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...12:41pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point . Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master . This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth . Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies? . Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.

Its LETS BASH A YANK DAY back with a flurry. If this pub gets away with it then NO writer will be safe over their work being stolen. or No business safe with its special name.

[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob
byist
', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary.
JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.[/p][/quote]I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point
.
Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master
.
This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth
.
Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies?
.
Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.[/p][/quote]Its LETS BASH A YANK DAY back with a flurry.
If this pub gets away with it then NO writer will be safe over their work being stolen.
or No business safe with its special name.voiceinthecrowd

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

southy wrote…

Well Well Well, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground the word Hobbit or Hobit is and old English word that stop being used in the 1800's, its short for hobbitry', "'Hobbist','hob byist ', 'Hobbism". You will need to return to books to find that out, on line you have the modern term for the word Hobbit dating to after the Book was writen LotR, There no copy rights to words that end up in a Dictionary. JRR Tolkien if you do your research on this man you will find he used real place names, real people names, a lot of the place names come from Somerset and Devonshire where Tolkien spent most of his time when writing.

I am no lawyer but Southy seems to have a very valid point . Sending threatening notices is part of so called American way of life. They also think they can bully the world into submission, and our governments seem to roll over for them as if nation that was once British colony is now its master . This mind set should stop. People should get behind this small business in Southampton, because if properly exercised people power could win over arrogance and mega wealth . Why our political class, which is often in gung ho mode for bullying weak nations always fails to stand up to USA’s government and its big companies? . Big businesses do not like bad publicity, it hurts their profits. So a well organised campaign by supporters of underdog pub in Southampton against powerful American enterprise, if organise properly, could eventually find a reasonable solution.

Its LETS BASH A YANK DAY back with a flurry. If this pub gets away with it then NO writer will be safe over their work being stolen. or No business safe with its special name.

Score: 0

Dave Juson says...12:41pm Tue 13 Mar 12

The action is petty and pointless. There might have been some case if the pub had changed its name following Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy, or when the name was changed to “The Hobbit” from the Portswood Hotel 20-odd years ago, – Saul Zaentz produced Ralph Bakshi’s disappointing 1978 film of Lord of The Rings – but it is now an established business, which enshrines literary characters, not a film. . It’s worth adding that the Saul Zaentz Company are currently publicising a marketing operation under the title of http://www.middleear th.com/about.html which gives every appearance of being a somewhat cynical and aggressive cash-in of their rights over J.R Tolkien’s estate. One might suppose that they see the popular hostelry as an unwelcome distraction from their Americanisation of Middle Earth. . Having drunk in some of Tolkien’s favourite boozers in Oxford, I think he’d find our Hobbit a bit noisy and youth orientated, but its a good boozer and I’m pretty certain he’d side with our Bevois Valley licensees over a bunch of Los Angeles based spivs.

The action is petty and pointless. There might have been some case if the pub had changed its name following Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy, or when the name was changed to “The Hobbit” from the Portswood Hotel 20-odd years ago, – Saul Zaentz produced Ralph Bakshi’s disappointing 1978 film of Lord of The Rings – but it is now an established business, which enshrines literary characters, not a film.
.
It’s worth adding that the Saul Zaentz Company are currently publicising a marketing operation under the title of http://www.middleear
th.com/about.html which gives every appearance of being a somewhat cynical and aggressive cash-in of their rights over J.R Tolkien’s estate. One might suppose that they see the popular hostelry as an unwelcome distraction from their Americanisation of Middle Earth.
.
Having drunk in some of Tolkien’s favourite boozers in Oxford, I think he’d find our Hobbit a bit noisy and youth orientated, but its a good boozer and I’m pretty certain he’d side with our Bevois Valley licensees over a bunch of Los Angeles based spivs.Dave Juson

The action is petty and pointless. There might have been some case if the pub had changed its name following Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings trilogy, or when the name was changed to “The Hobbit” from the Portswood Hotel 20-odd years ago, – Saul Zaentz produced Ralph Bakshi’s disappointing 1978 film of Lord of The Rings – but it is now an established business, which enshrines literary characters, not a film. . It’s worth adding that the Saul Zaentz Company are currently publicising a marketing operation under the title of http://www.middleear th.com/about.html which gives every appearance of being a somewhat cynical and aggressive cash-in of their rights over J.R Tolkien’s estate. One might suppose that they see the popular hostelry as an unwelcome distraction from their Americanisation of Middle Earth. . Having drunk in some of Tolkien’s favourite boozers in Oxford, I think he’d find our Hobbit a bit noisy and youth orientated, but its a good boozer and I’m pretty certain he’d side with our Bevois Valley licensees over a bunch of Los Angeles based spivs.

Score: 0

southy says...12:43pm Tue 13 Mar 12

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

southy wrote…

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title. I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House. Most businesses don't I understand It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak. Not all films make it and money is lost. If you want films you need to think

No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design. Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is. And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.

[quote][p][bold]voiceinthecrowd[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.[/p][/quote]You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title.
I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House.
Most businesses don't I understand
It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak.
Not all films make it and money is lost.
If you want films you need to think[/p][/quote]No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design.
Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is.
And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.southy

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

southy wrote…

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title. I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House. Most businesses don't I understand It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak. Not all films make it and money is lost. If you want films you need to think

No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design. Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is. And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.

Score: 0

AM says...12:51pm Tue 13 Mar 12

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.AM

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

Score: 0

stuartjebbitt says...12:54pm Tue 13 Mar 12

as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greed

as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greedstuartjebbitt

as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greed

Score: 0

jase71 says...1:01pm Tue 13 Mar 12

It doesn't matter where the word Hobbit originates, it doesn't matter how long the place has been called " The Hobbit", what matters is the pub is blatantly based on the works of Tolkien, therefore the yanks have a right to insist on a change, they are just protecting there investment.

It doesn't matter where the word Hobbit originates, it doesn't matter how long the place has been called " The Hobbit", what matters is the pub is blatantly based on the works of Tolkien, therefore the yanks have a right to insist on a change, they are just protecting there investment.jase71

It doesn't matter where the word Hobbit originates, it doesn't matter how long the place has been called " The Hobbit", what matters is the pub is blatantly based on the works of Tolkien, therefore the yanks have a right to insist on a change, they are just protecting there investment.

Score: 0

stuartjebbitt says...1:02pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Just wait until the Olympics start - then anyone who dares try and make a few quid off the back of that overblown sports day, will be suitably crushed from on high! Only the 'Official' products such as those well known 'health' foods , Coca-cola and McDonalds will be allowed to profit - which by the way, you will be subsidising. It's already 2 BILLION over budget - Just imagine what services could have been saved. Despite all the propaganda, no modern olympics has done anything other than leave the hosts with debts and infrastructure that becomes redundant and gets sold off cheap.

Just wait until the Olympics start - then anyone who dares try and make a few quid off the back of that overblown sports day, will be suitably crushed from on high!
Only the 'Official' products such as those well known 'health' foods , Coca-cola and McDonalds will be allowed to profit - which by the way, you will be subsidising. It's already 2 BILLION over budget - Just imagine what services could have been saved. Despite all the propaganda, no modern olympics has done anything other than leave the hosts with debts and infrastructure that becomes redundant and gets sold off cheap.stuartjebbitt

Just wait until the Olympics start - then anyone who dares try and make a few quid off the back of that overblown sports day, will be suitably crushed from on high! Only the 'Official' products such as those well known 'health' foods , Coca-cola and McDonalds will be allowed to profit - which by the way, you will be subsidising. It's already 2 BILLION over budget - Just imagine what services could have been saved. Despite all the propaganda, no modern olympics has done anything other than leave the hosts with debts and infrastructure that becomes redundant and gets sold off cheap.

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...1:02pm Tue 13 Mar 12

stuartjebbitt wrote…

as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greed

I can see your point but say 100 world wide did it then it would mean more. Compromise should be sought however. Why does the Pub not offer say TO PAY AN ANNUAL LICENCE then suggest it goes to Charity That then puts it back in the American half

[quote][p][bold]stuartjebbitt[/bold] wrote:
as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greed[/p][/quote]I can see your point but say 100 world wide did it then it would mean more.
Compromise should be sought however.
Why does the Pub not offer say TO PAY AN ANNUAL LICENCE then suggest it goes to Charity
That then puts it back in the American halfvoiceinthecrowd

stuartjebbitt wrote…

as if the takings from a pub is seriously going to threaten a multi-million dollar film franchise! There's such a thing as live and let live and being magnanimous enough not to have to crush the little guy. I suspect Tolkein himself would be in the side of the little guy against the behemoth of corporate greed

I can see your point but say 100 world wide did it then it would mean more. Compromise should be sought however. Why does the Pub not offer say TO PAY AN ANNUAL LICENCE then suggest it goes to Charity That then puts it back in the American half

Score: 0

bobbyboy says...1:08pm Tue 13 Mar 12

The Hobbit has been a landmark for many years the solution is easy Stop selling things that relate to the Books and invent your own along the same theme then change the name to SOBEIT (invented by me given to you the Hobbit lol)in defiance of the American Masters. Good Luck.

The Hobbit has been a landmark for many years the solution is easy Stop selling things that relate to the Books and invent your own along the same theme then change the name to SOBEIT (invented by me given to you the Hobbit lol)in defiance of the American Masters. Good Luck.bobbyboy

The Hobbit has been a landmark for many years the solution is easy Stop selling things that relate to the Books and invent your own along the same theme then change the name to SOBEIT (invented by me given to you the Hobbit lol)in defiance of the American Masters. Good Luck.

Score: 0

Chas O'Bursledon says...1:12pm Tue 13 Mar 12

I have eamiled dconlin@edwardswildm an.com who is an American Lawyer from the law firm handling this. I wrote thus: I have attached a URL from a newspaper article in my local newspaper in Southampton, England. http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/9585643. The_Hobbit_in_battle _with_Hollywood/?ref =eb I find it absolutely ludicrous that a large US based organisation sees fit to attack a family business in the UK which has used the name “The Hobbit” long before your client’s films were made. I should imagine that a great Englishman such as J.R.R. Tolkien would be horrified that something so complimentary to his work would be the subject of what can only be seen as “bullying” tactics by your firm’s American clients. I hope that this matter is heard in the English courts and that one of our judges tells your client the true meaning of freedom of expression, a concept which is, I believe, embedded in your constitution. Yours sincerely Do the same. It is time we told the Americans they they do not rule the world and most certainly not us.

I have eamiled dconlin@edwardswildm
an.com
who is an American Lawyer from the law firm handling this. I wrote thus:
I have attached a URL from a newspaper article in my local newspaper in Southampton, England.
http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/news/9585643.
The_Hobbit_in_battle
_with_Hollywood/?ref
=eb
I find it absolutely ludicrous that a large US based organisation sees fit to attack a family business in the UK which has used the name “The Hobbit” long before your client’s films were made. I should imagine that a great Englishman such as J.R.R. Tolkien would be horrified that something so complimentary to his work would be the subject of what can only be seen as “bullying” tactics by your firm’s American clients.
I hope that this matter is heard in the English courts and that one of our judges tells your client the true meaning of freedom of expression, a concept which is, I believe, embedded in your constitution.
Yours sincerely
Do the same. It is time we told the Americans they they do not rule the world and most certainly not us.Chas O'Bursledon

I have eamiled dconlin@edwardswildm an.com who is an American Lawyer from the law firm handling this. I wrote thus: I have attached a URL from a newspaper article in my local newspaper in Southampton, England. http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/9585643. The_Hobbit_in_battle _with_Hollywood/?ref =eb I find it absolutely ludicrous that a large US based organisation sees fit to attack a family business in the UK which has used the name “The Hobbit” long before your client’s films were made. I should imagine that a great Englishman such as J.R.R. Tolkien would be horrified that something so complimentary to his work would be the subject of what can only be seen as “bullying” tactics by your firm’s American clients. I hope that this matter is heard in the English courts and that one of our judges tells your client the true meaning of freedom of expression, a concept which is, I believe, embedded in your constitution. Yours sincerely Do the same. It is time we told the Americans they they do not rule the world and most certainly not us.

Score: 0

Shoong says...1:12pm Tue 13 Mar 12

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?Shoong

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

Score: 0

Chas O'Bursledon says...1:18pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?[/p][/quote]The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!Chas O'Bursledon

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Score: 0

batesieboy says...1:26pm Tue 13 Mar 12

allsaintsnocurves wrote…

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

Yes, there's one in Boracay, Philippines, as well. Don't know if you can call them "midgets" any more. And where did the England rugby team lob hobbits around? This is ridiculous!

[quote][p][bold]allsaintsnocurves[/bold] wrote:
There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.[/p][/quote]Yes, there's one in Boracay, Philippines, as well. Don't know if you can call them "midgets" any more. And where did the England rugby team lob hobbits around? This is ridiculous!batesieboy

allsaintsnocurves wrote…

There's a pub in the Philippenes in Manila called 'The Hobbit'...and was even named specifically after the book and even has midgets working in there as bar staff! Maybe the Hobbit in Southampton should get in touch with them and fight it together. I'm sure there are others.

Yes, there's one in Boracay, Philippines, as well. Don't know if you can call them "midgets" any more. And where did the England rugby team lob hobbits around? This is ridiculous!

Score: 0

Paramjit Bahia says...1:28pm Tue 13 Mar 12

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some lightParamjit Bahia

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

Score: 0

southy says...1:34pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

[quote][p][bold]Chas O'Bursledon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?[/p][/quote]The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!![/p][/quote]Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.southy

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

Score: 0

southy says...1:36pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

Yes there was it had the same result as Kelloggs.

[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote:
How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light[/p][/quote]Yes there was it had the same result as Kelloggs.southy

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

Yes there was it had the same result as Kelloggs.

Score: 0

MissA says...1:41pm Tue 13 Mar 12

I remember this pub from my youth..... It's always been The Hobbit. Even people that haven't drank there have heard of it! Leave it alone, Yanks! I bet they haven't even visited it to see what a little english pub looks like! If it was a chain such as wetherspoons or TGIs then I would totally understand- but its not. What next? No Robin Hood pub? Watch out Durley village.....

I remember this pub from my youth..... It's always been The Hobbit. Even people that haven't drank there have heard of it! Leave it alone, Yanks! I bet they haven't even visited it to see what a little english pub looks like! If it was a chain such as wetherspoons or TGIs then I would totally understand- but its not. What next? No Robin Hood pub? Watch out Durley village.....MissA

I remember this pub from my youth..... It's always been The Hobbit. Even people that haven't drank there have heard of it! Leave it alone, Yanks! I bet they haven't even visited it to see what a little english pub looks like! If it was a chain such as wetherspoons or TGIs then I would totally understand- but its not. What next? No Robin Hood pub? Watch out Durley village.....

Score: 0

southy says...1:42pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

You are permitted to do all so, It only becomes copy right, when you copy a Trade name in the same unique format thats is a trade brand design. Like I could make Cornflakes and call it Kelloggs as long I dont use there unique brand designed

[quote][p][bold]Chas O'Bursledon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?[/p][/quote]The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!![/p][/quote]You are permitted to do all so, It only becomes copy right, when you copy a Trade name in the same unique format thats is a trade brand design.
Like I could make Cornflakes and call it Kelloggs as long I dont use there unique brand designedsouthy

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

You are permitted to do all so, It only becomes copy right, when you copy a Trade name in the same unique format thats is a trade brand design. Like I could make Cornflakes and call it Kelloggs as long I dont use there unique brand designed

Score: 0

lowe esteem says...1:53pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Other side of the story: Have visited this pub, and not even associated it with all that drug-fuelled sorcery nonsense. Thing was, I was out the back 'garden' watching Desmond Dekker performing to an eclectic mix of students, Jamaicans, various grown up and notso skins and mods and just curious. Bar was out the back so didn't really notice the 'theme'. Not going to rush back now i've been made more aware of it though. But good luck to you, surely room for all?

Other side of the story:
Have visited this pub, and not even associated it with all that drug-fuelled sorcery nonsense.
Thing was, I was out the back 'garden' watching Desmond Dekker performing to an eclectic mix of students, Jamaicans, various grown up and notso skins and mods and just curious. Bar was out the back so didn't really notice the 'theme'. Not going to rush back now i've been made more aware of it though. But good luck to you, surely room for all?lowe esteem

Other side of the story: Have visited this pub, and not even associated it with all that drug-fuelled sorcery nonsense. Thing was, I was out the back 'garden' watching Desmond Dekker performing to an eclectic mix of students, Jamaicans, various grown up and notso skins and mods and just curious. Bar was out the back so didn't really notice the 'theme'. Not going to rush back now i've been made more aware of it though. But good luck to you, surely room for all?

Score: 0

Torchie1 says...2:13pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

Since the production rights moved from Lotus to Caterham Cars almost forty years ago would you like to reconsider your definition of 'a few years' ?

[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote:
How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light[/p][/quote]Since the production rights moved from Lotus to Caterham Cars almost forty years ago would you like to reconsider your definition of 'a few years' ?Torchie1

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

Since the production rights moved from Lotus to Caterham Cars almost forty years ago would you like to reconsider your definition of 'a few years' ?

Score: 0

AM says...2:26pm Tue 13 Mar 12

By the way in Salcombe the Victoria pub has accommodation in its grounds called The Hobbit House. Is the Saul Zaentz Company going to start proceedings there too. where will this stop. I suspect Tolkien is rolling in his grave

By the way in Salcombe the Victoria pub has accommodation in its grounds called The Hobbit House. Is the Saul Zaentz Company going to start proceedings there too. where will this stop. I suspect Tolkien is rolling in his graveAM

By the way in Salcombe the Victoria pub has accommodation in its grounds called The Hobbit House. Is the Saul Zaentz Company going to start proceedings there too. where will this stop. I suspect Tolkien is rolling in his grave

Score: 0

Frank28 says...2:44pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Although it all seems very silly; the Courts come down hard on copyright infringement cases. It's not the end of the world if the pub has to change its trading name and decor.

Although it all seems very silly; the Courts come down hard on copyright infringement cases. It's not the end of the world if the pub has to change its trading name and decor.Frank28

Although it all seems very silly; the Courts come down hard on copyright infringement cases. It's not the end of the world if the pub has to change its trading name and decor.

Score: 0

clausentum says...2:45pm Tue 13 Mar 12

bigfella777 wrote…

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]SpiderMeringue[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.[/p][/quote]Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.[/p][/quote]Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.[/p][/quote]You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.clausentum

bigfella777 wrote…

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

Score: 0

Pixiienot says...2:58pm Tue 13 Mar 12

clausentum wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.

[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]SpiderMeringue[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.[/p][/quote]Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.[/p][/quote]Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.[/p][/quote]You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.[/p][/quote]A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.Pixiienot

clausentum wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.

Score: 0

St Retford says...3:01pm Tue 13 Mar 12

I imagine the pub is absolutely LOVING the publicity all this will generate. If they're smart they'll use this and get themselves known right around the world.

I imagine the pub is absolutely LOVING the publicity all this will generate. If they're smart they'll use this and get themselves known right around the world.St Retford

I imagine the pub is absolutely LOVING the publicity all this will generate. If they're smart they'll use this and get themselves known right around the world.

Score: 0

ssnaked23 says...3:05pm Tue 13 Mar 12

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.ssnaked23

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

Score: 0

clausentum says...3:15pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Pixiienot wrote…

clausentum wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.

Bingo!! Article: DRIVERS PUT AT RISK AS THUGS WEDGE LEVEL CROSSING BARRIERS OPEN 6:19pm Monday 12th March 2012 Direct quote from the Hyperbolic Username: "bigfella777 says... 8:00am Tue 13 Mar 12 You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea."

[quote][p][bold]Pixiienot[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]clausentum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]SpiderMeringue[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote:
Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.[/p][/quote]Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.[/p][/quote]Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.[/p][/quote]You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.[/p][/quote]A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.[/p][/quote]Bingo!!
Article:
DRIVERS PUT AT RISK AS THUGS WEDGE LEVEL CROSSING BARRIERS OPEN
6:19pm Monday 12th March 2012
Direct quote from the Hyperbolic Username:
"bigfella777 says... 8:00am Tue 13 Mar 12
You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea."clausentum

Pixiienot wrote…

clausentum wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

SpiderMeringue wrote…

bigfella777 wrote…

Its a freaks pub anyway,the only time I ever went in there some people thought it was hilarious to soak everyone with water pistols.They can change the name and the hair colour of everyone in there as far as Im concerned.

Yes and everybody should conform to your expectations. Indeed. Heaven forbid people experiment with their own looks.

Its about class and neither you or this establishment have any.

You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea.

A stereotypical statement from a person who is trying to argue about people being different.. A tad hypocritical.

Bingo!! Article: DRIVERS PUT AT RISK AS THUGS WEDGE LEVEL CROSSING BARRIERS OPEN 6:19pm Monday 12th March 2012 Direct quote from the Hyperbolic Username: "bigfella777 says... 8:00am Tue 13 Mar 12 You are such a bore,I can imagine you sitting there in your flannel trousers and tweed jacket straining your old eyes to look at the interweb with a cup of cold tea."

Score: 0

aberis says...3:23pm Tue 13 Mar 12

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

[quote][p][bold]ssnaked23[/bold] wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.[/p][/quote]The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.
An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.
if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.aberis

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Score: 0

Muslio says...3:32pm Tue 13 Mar 12

From "The Denham tracts : a collection of folklore" published 1846-1959 in tracts and pamphlets by Mr Denham. FOLKLORE OF THE NORTH OF ENGLAND Hobbits, a class of spirits. Thus, prior art from Tolkien for the name Hobbit - movie studios can't claim Hobbit as a word. Might have to drop the Gandolf cocktails though.

From "The Denham tracts : a collection of folklore" published 1846-1959 in tracts and pamphlets by Mr Denham.
FOLKLORE OF THE NORTH OF ENGLAND
Hobbits, a class of spirits.
Thus, prior art from Tolkien for the name Hobbit - movie studios can't claim Hobbit as a word.
Might have to drop the Gandolf cocktails though.Muslio

From "The Denham tracts : a collection of folklore" published 1846-1959 in tracts and pamphlets by Mr Denham. FOLKLORE OF THE NORTH OF ENGLAND Hobbits, a class of spirits. Thus, prior art from Tolkien for the name Hobbit - movie studios can't claim Hobbit as a word. Might have to drop the Gandolf cocktails though.

Score: 0

southy says...3:36pm Tue 13 Mar 12

aberis wrote…

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ssnaked23[/bold] wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.[/p][/quote]The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.
An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.
if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.[/p][/quote]Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).southy

aberis wrote…

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

Score: 0

aberis says...3:43pm Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways: 1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service. 2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field. Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage. E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chas O'Bursledon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?[/p][/quote]The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!![/p][/quote]Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways:
1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service.
2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field.
Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage.
E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.aberis

southy wrote…

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways: 1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service. 2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field. Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage. E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

Score: 0

aberis says...3:46pm Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ssnaked23[/bold] wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.[/p][/quote]The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.
An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.
if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.[/p][/quote]Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).[/p][/quote]Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...aberis

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...

Score: 0

nedscrumpo says...4:07pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.

Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.nedscrumpo

Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.

Score: 0

southy says...4:28pm Tue 13 Mar 12

nedscrumpo wrote…

Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.

The would put a total mucker on things.

[quote][p][bold]nedscrumpo[/bold] wrote:
Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.[/p][/quote]The would put a total mucker on things.southy

nedscrumpo wrote…

Perhaps the licensee should change her name by deed poll to MRS HOBBIT.

The would put a total mucker on things.

Score: 0

southy says...4:35pm Tue 13 Mar 12

aberis wrote…

southy wrote…

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways: 1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service. 2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field. Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage. E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design. Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7

[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chas O'Bursledon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?[/p][/quote]The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!![/p][/quote]Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways:
1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service.
2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field.
Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage.
E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.[/p][/quote]They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design.
Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7southy

aberis wrote…

southy wrote…

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways: 1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service. 2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field. Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage. E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design. Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7

Score: 0

drodge181 says...4:43pm Tue 13 Mar 12

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

I think you ought to wake up get with it We are not back in the 60s 70s this is nothing but discrimination against woman and as for the hobbit pub good luck hope you can beat these money tycoons who think they can bully us normal people around they dont even live in this country who the hell do they think they are iv been to the pub a few times and its great so dont give up keep fighting

[quote][p][bold]voiceinthecrowd[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]mack chinnon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote:
All theme pubs should be demolished.
Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe.
The only sign on the door should be;
NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS)
NO CHILDREN
NO DOGS
NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]Turn it into a Hooters.[/p][/quote]Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks.
There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.[/p][/quote]I think you ought to wake up get with it We are not back in the 60s 70s this is nothing but discrimination against woman and as for the hobbit pub good luck hope you can beat these money tycoons who think they can bully us normal people around they dont even live in this country who the hell do they think they are iv been to the pub a few times and its great so dont give up keep fightingdrodge181

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

I think you ought to wake up get with it We are not back in the 60s 70s this is nothing but discrimination against woman and as for the hobbit pub good luck hope you can beat these money tycoons who think they can bully us normal people around they dont even live in this country who the hell do they think they are iv been to the pub a few times and its great so dont give up keep fighting

Score: 0

southy says...4:43pm Tue 13 Mar 12

aberis wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...

The imagery was just the name, The imagery used in the films all was copys of some one else that had no connection to the film industray or the books or the family and pre dates the books, even if you look at the maps in the Tolkien books they are imagery of real maps, but insted of the hills ranges he increase them to mountains ranges, the river are real river corses with just a change of name.

[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ssnaked23[/bold] wrote:
As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.[/p][/quote]The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark.
An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark.
if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.[/p][/quote]Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).[/p][/quote]Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...[/p][/quote]The imagery was just the name, The imagery used in the films all was copys of some one else that had no connection to the film industray or the books or the family and pre dates the books, even if you look at the maps in the Tolkien books they are imagery of real maps, but insted of the hills ranges he increase them to mountains ranges, the river are real river corses with just a change of name.southy

aberis wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

ssnaked23 wrote…

As someone as already said you cant copyright a name, you can Trademark a name. Even if its been copyrighted for a film thats all its been copyrighted for. In the States they have a thing called Title Registration for films where titles are registered though they dont have to be used so if you were to make a film you couldnt call it The Hobbit but you could call it Bilbo Baggins, the Hobbit instead as long as it wasnt registered. I tend to agree that with regards to the merchandising that may well be slightly a different issue as they appear to be trading with the LOTR images but they cant force them to change the name of the pub, think about it, what about all the pubs for example called the Rose & Crown, does that mean they would all have to change bar one, I dont think so. If you Google restaurants for example, you can find those named after famous literary works e.g. Romeo and Juliet. Im sure that there are members of WS still exist in the UK but you havent heard them banging on about "you cant use that name", the Sceptics need to get it into perspective and look around. They cant have it ALL their own way.

The other issue with a trademark is usage. The pub being called "The Hobbit" in shouldn't be an issue; as it has already be said, Hobbit is an 'olde' English word which has been in existence for centuries. The issue arises over the usage of the word. The fact the pub is using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch (namely drinks), would be deemed as a breach of this trademark. An example of this is Dyno-rod claiming Trademark to the day-glo orange used for their vans and company logo. This means that although other companies can use this colour for their vans and logo, if the company operates within the same business market i.e. plumbing; they would be in breach of the trademark. if the pub was to stop using the Tolkien characters for advertising and merch, there should not be any need for the pub to change it's name; as the name was in use prior to the trademark applications in 2002 and 2011.

Then you hit the problem of Tolkien him self, he used real names and real places. like calling a drink Gandalf would not be breeching copy right laws or trade marks because "Gandalf" is a surname and mythitcal being (Norse Orgin).

Correct but using the imagery of Tolkien's "Gandalf" to represent and advertise the drink would ...

The imagery was just the name, The imagery used in the films all was copys of some one else that had no connection to the film industray or the books or the family and pre dates the books, even if you look at the maps in the Tolkien books they are imagery of real maps, but insted of the hills ranges he increase them to mountains ranges, the river are real river corses with just a change of name.

Score: 0

southy says...4:47pm Tue 13 Mar 12

And why I said, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground

And why I said, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky groundsouthy

And why I said, Saul Zaentz Company is on very sticky ground

Score: 0

cityboy74 says...4:51pm Tue 13 Mar 12

change the name of the pub to Saul Zaentz is a giant bell-end.

change the name of the pub to Saul Zaentz is a giant bell-end.cityboy74

change the name of the pub to Saul Zaentz is a giant bell-end.

Score: 0

City Saint says...5:03pm Tue 13 Mar 12

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.

[quote][p][bold]RBurns17[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.
When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.
The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....
Seriously people....[/p][/quote]You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.City Saint

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.

Score: 0

Pixiienot says...5:09pm Tue 13 Mar 12

This is becoming pretty repetitive.. NAME OF PUB = OK RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK we get it ZZZzzz.

This is becoming pretty repetitive..
NAME OF PUB = OK
RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK
we get it ZZZzzz.Pixiienot

This is becoming pretty repetitive.. NAME OF PUB = OK RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK we get it ZZZzzz.

Score: 0

cantthinkofone says...5:14pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Copyright bullying is certainly a problem. But this pub have pretty much invited trouble. Their promos, available on their website, feature a lot of stills from the LoTR films. If they hadn't done that I'd have a lot of sympathy as the universe of Middle Earth is a long established part of the public consciousness. But ripping off the studio's work was/is a really dumb move.

Copyright bullying is certainly a problem.
But this pub have pretty much invited trouble. Their promos, available on their website, feature a lot of stills from the LoTR films. If they hadn't done that I'd have a lot of sympathy as the universe of Middle Earth is a long established part of the public consciousness. But ripping off the studio's work was/is a really dumb move.cantthinkofone

Copyright bullying is certainly a problem. But this pub have pretty much invited trouble. Their promos, available on their website, feature a lot of stills from the LoTR films. If they hadn't done that I'd have a lot of sympathy as the universe of Middle Earth is a long established part of the public consciousness. But ripping off the studio's work was/is a really dumb move.

Score: 0

KingWrecked says...5:15pm Tue 13 Mar 12

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Yeah well done brains, do your research first or you too could be a Hollywood laywer: The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859. The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies. So in your world, I could write a book with the word Apple in it and then go on to sue Apple, The Beatles and every greengrocer in the UK for copyright infringement.

[quote][p][bold]RBurns17[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.
When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.
The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....
Seriously people....[/p][/quote]Yeah well done brains, do your research first or you too could be a Hollywood laywer:
The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859.
The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of
boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies.
So in your world, I could write a book with the word Apple in it and then go on to sue Apple, The Beatles and every greengrocer in the UK for copyright infringement.KingWrecked

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

Yeah well done brains, do your research first or you too could be a Hollywood laywer: The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859. The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies. So in your world, I could write a book with the word Apple in it and then go on to sue Apple, The Beatles and every greengrocer in the UK for copyright infringement.

Score: 0

cantthinkofone says...5:18pm Tue 13 Mar 12

City Saint wrote…

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.

I'd think they would have a pretty clear angle on that. Their films are marketed at kids. The pub is, well, a pub. Those two things don't mesh well, and they could easily argue that associating their 'brand' with a boozer tarnishes its reputation. Spurious in the real world I know, but I can see that argument being held up in court as plausible enough for judgement to go against the pub. I'm legally trained at grad level, but I've not much knowledge or experience of copyright law specifically.

[quote][p][bold]City Saint[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]RBurns17[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s.
When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien.
The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy....
Seriously people....[/p][/quote]You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.[/p][/quote]I'd think they would have a pretty clear angle on that.
Their films are marketed at kids. The pub is, well, a pub. Those two things don't mesh well, and they could easily argue that associating their 'brand' with a boozer tarnishes its reputation.
Spurious in the real world I know, but I can see that argument being held up in court as plausible enough for judgement to go against the pub.
I'm legally trained at grad level, but I've not much knowledge or experience of copyright law specifically.cantthinkofone

City Saint wrote…

RBurns17 wrote…

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

You people do realize that The Hobbit was originally a book published by J.R.R. Tolkien in the 1930s, correct? A Hobbit by definition is a completely fictional creature, created by J.R.R. Tolkien, who died in the 1970s. When you create such a thing you own the rights to it. His estate and their business partners have every right to make this demand because without Tolkien's creation there is no such thing as a Hobbit. There is no way to prove there was no harm intended when they are using a word that has no other meaning outside the world of Middle-Earth created by Tolkien. The movies are adaptations to works created long before this pub existed. If you visit the pub's website it's completely obvious why they have chose action against this pub, since all of their promotional materials use images and themes from the Lord of the Rings trilogy.... Seriously people....

You misunderstand the nature of "harm" in copyright infringement. The Hollywood company will be expected to demonstrate how the existence of The Hobbit has harmed or will harm its copyright, which was established only afteer the pub was named. In order for the courts to issue a finding on behalf of the Hollywood company it will have to establish harm, and in thus case it won't be able to. Trust me, I've seen a fair few copyright bust-ups.

I'd think they would have a pretty clear angle on that. Their films are marketed at kids. The pub is, well, a pub. Those two things don't mesh well, and they could easily argue that associating their 'brand' with a boozer tarnishes its reputation. Spurious in the real world I know, but I can see that argument being held up in court as plausible enough for judgement to go against the pub. I'm legally trained at grad level, but I've not much knowledge or experience of copyright law specifically.

Score: 0

The Music Man says...5:21pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Pixiienot wrote…

This is becoming pretty repetitive.. NAME OF PUB = OK RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK we get it ZZZzzz.

you nailed it

[quote][p][bold]Pixiienot[/bold] wrote:
This is becoming pretty repetitive..
NAME OF PUB = OK
RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK
we get it ZZZzzz.[/p][/quote]you nailed itThe Music Man

Pixiienot wrote…

This is becoming pretty repetitive.. NAME OF PUB = OK RIPPING OFF LOTR PHOTOS,NAMES ECT = NOT OK we get it ZZZzzz.

you nailed it

Score: 0

rightway says...5:35pm Tue 13 Mar 12

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

Yes

[quote][p][bold]voiceinthecrowd[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]mack chinnon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rightway[/bold] wrote: All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES[/p][/quote]Turn it into a Hooters.[/p][/quote]Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.[/p][/quote]Yesrightway

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

mack chinnon wrote…

rightway wrote…

All theme pubs should be demolished. Pubs are for men to go to and drink beer. They should never be used by the sad people who want to live in a land of make believe. The only sign on the door should be; NO WOMEN (EXCEPT THE STRIPPERS) NO CHILDREN NO DOGS NO MOBILE PHONES

Turn it into a Hooters.

Get a life. I can only assume you want all pubs to be heavy drinking places where people can get smashed and then the police have to foot the bill cleaning the streets at night of drunks. There is nothing wrong with theme nights but I think the point is missed the PUB sells memorablia for a PROFIT. Thats why no doubt they came to the attention of the Yanks.

Yes

Score: 0

Cookiecutter says...6:09pm Tue 13 Mar 12

I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company. My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.

I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company.
My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.Cookiecutter

I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company. My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.

Score: 0

dango says...6:09pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Dear The Saul Zaentz Company, Hobbits are scum. While you're about it, feel free to prosecute me for slander or defamtion of character, either or, I don't care.

Dear The Saul Zaentz Company, Hobbits are scum. While you're about it, feel free to prosecute me for slander or defamtion of character, either or, I don't care.dango

Dear The Saul Zaentz Company, Hobbits are scum. While you're about it, feel free to prosecute me for slander or defamtion of character, either or, I don't care.

Score: 0

Georgem says...6:56pm Tue 13 Mar 12

waggers5 wrote…

This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.

True, but it's all really down to who can afford to fight it in court.

[quote][p][bold]waggers5[/bold] wrote:
This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.[/p][/quote]True, but it's all really down to who can afford to fight it in court.Georgem

waggers5 wrote…

This is a pub we're talking about here. It's not a movie, a stage production, or merchandise of any kind. The film studio's rights surely don't cover this.

True, but it's all really down to who can afford to fight it in court.

Score: 0

pod says...7:19pm Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

southy wrote…

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title. I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House. Most businesses don't I understand It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak. Not all films make it and money is lost. If you want films you need to think

No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design. Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is. And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.

hate to agree with you mr southy, but you are correct, I have a business name, which in its self is unusual, but anyone else could still call their business the same name, but my design is copyrighted and they would not be able to use that

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]voiceinthecrowd[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.[/p][/quote]You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title.
I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House.
Most businesses don't I understand
It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak.
Not all films make it and money is lost.
If you want films you need to think[/p][/quote]No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design.
Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is.
And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.[/p][/quote]hate to agree with you mr southy, but you are correct, I have a business name, which in its self is unusual, but anyone else could still call their business the same name, but my design is copyrighted and they would not be able to use thatpod

southy wrote…

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

southy wrote…

To have copy rights over a word, you need to invent a word, it takes a lot more than just use a part of word or add on to word or cut a word and add on, it has to have whole total new meaning also, to have copy rights over letter you need to invent a design of the letters, can not use any that as all ready been used.

You are missing the point you can copyright a name such as Hobbit if you intend to make it a film title. I wonder if the Pub registered the name with say Companies House. Most businesses don't I understand It cost the company making the film millions and obviously they want to protect their theme so to speak. Not all films make it and money is lost. If you want films you need to think

No you can not you can only copy right the Design of the word if its a totally new design. Kelloggs is a prefect example, the word not copy right but the design is. And the film used a design in letters that has all ready been used before copy right laws came into being.

hate to agree with you mr southy, but you are correct, I have a business name, which in its self is unusual, but anyone else could still call their business the same name, but my design is copyrighted and they would not be able to use that

Score: 0

forest hump says...7:31pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Does that mean Steven Spielberg cannot make a movie called "Pilley Working Men's Club"?

Does that mean Steven Spielberg cannot make a movie called "Pilley Working Men's Club"?forest hump

Does that mean Steven Spielberg cannot make a movie called "Pilley Working Men's Club"?

Score: 0

forest hump says...7:32pm Tue 13 Mar 12

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Icklelady[/bold] wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.[/p][/quote]The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.[/p][/quote]More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.[/p][/quote]That was the Hoblerforest hump

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Score: 0

pod says...7:33pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

I am a short local person, so how about we re-name it after another set of spoof books - The Soddit or the Bored of the Rings, both worth a read.

[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote:
How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit.
.
Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light[/p][/quote]I am a short local person, so how about we re-name it after another set of spoof books - The Soddit or the Bored of the Rings, both worth a read.pod

Paramjit Bahia wrote…

How about renaming it 'Old Hobbit' or "Hobbit of Soton" or “English Hobbit” “Local Hobbit” etc, could that be the way around the problem? For short local people still be calling it Hobbit. . Was there not a case over Lotus 7 few years ago, when they challenged some small firm making a similar sports car? Some legal expert on here may shed some light

I am a short local person, so how about we re-name it after another set of spoof books - The Soddit or the Bored of the Rings, both worth a read.

Score: 0

100%HANTSBOY says...8:09pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!!100%HANTSBOY

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Score: 0

Georgem says...9:05pm Tue 13 Mar 12

100%HANTSBOY wrote…

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote:
Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!![/p][/quote]It's not. The guy's done this before. Google "hungry hobbit cafe", for starters.Georgem

100%HANTSBOY wrote…

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.

If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.mr.southampton

If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.

Score: 0

Lord Swood says...10:36pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Just rename it "The Obbit"

Just rename it "The Obbit"Lord Swood

Just rename it "The Obbit"

Score: 0

zarini says...10:45pm Tue 13 Mar 12

Soon any 'fiction name' could be reserved and no reason to waste money try to fight against this legal but absolutely stupid case. How about to rename to 'The Hobb it' we all will be pleased to come to your place?

Soon any 'fiction name' could be reserved and no reason to waste money try to fight against this legal but absolutely stupid case. How about to rename to 'The Hobb it' we all will be pleased to come to your place?zarini

Soon any 'fiction name' could be reserved and no reason to waste money try to fight against this legal but absolutely stupid case. How about to rename to 'The Hobb it' we all will be pleased to come to your place?

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...2:10am Wed 14 Mar 12

Cookiecutter wrote…

I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company. My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.

I cannot see how the pub has any right to use the word hobbit, or artwork or other materials based on Tolkien's work, unless they have sought the permission of whoever has the rights. The Hobbit pub could hold a competition to come up with a new name?

[quote][p][bold]Cookiecutter[/bold] wrote:
I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company.
My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.[/p][/quote]I cannot see how the pub has any right to use the word hobbit, or artwork or other materials based on Tolkien's work, unless they have sought the permission of whoever has the rights.
The Hobbit pub could hold a competition to come up with a new name?Sotonians_lets_pull_together

Cookiecutter wrote…

I can understand the reasoning behind this little problem, but as i see it, it comes down to use was first. Was the movie first or was the pub first to name. If it is the pub then the brewery own the name Hobbit. If its the film then give it back to them who care what the name is. No-one will want to see the film after that so who gets hurt the movie company. My name was given to me over 70 years ago and since then i have found dozens of people using the exact same name all over the world.

I cannot see how the pub has any right to use the word hobbit, or artwork or other materials based on Tolkien's work, unless they have sought the permission of whoever has the rights. The Hobbit pub could hold a competition to come up with a new name?

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...2:22am Wed 14 Mar 12

mr.southampton wrote…

If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.

exactly, what with aragorn cocktails, "one card to bind them all" loyalty cards, logos which includes drawings of actos from the films, Tom Bombadil's open mic night, rhythmdell (one jam to rule them all), cocktails including the gandalf, bilbo, gimli, legolas, frodo, arwen, merry, pippin, sauron, and gollum Anyone who owns the rights to the Tolkiens work, in print, or on film, or for merchandise, must clearly act if they become aware. It's pretty blatant.

[quote][p][bold]mr.southampton[/bold] wrote:
If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.[/p][/quote]exactly, what with aragorn cocktails, "one card to bind them all" loyalty cards, logos which includes drawings of actos from the films, Tom Bombadil's open mic night, rhythmdell (one jam to rule them all), cocktails including the gandalf, bilbo, gimli, legolas, frodo, arwen, merry, pippin, sauron, and gollum
Anyone who owns the rights to the Tolkiens work, in print, or on film, or for merchandise, must clearly act if they become aware.
It's pretty blatant.Sotonians_lets_pull_together

mr.southampton wrote…

If it was just a case of the name then I would have more sympathy with the Hobbit, after all it's been the Hobbit for as long as anyone can remember, but with the product names, fonts and images they've clearly crossed a line.

exactly, what with aragorn cocktails, "one card to bind them all" loyalty cards, logos which includes drawings of actos from the films, Tom Bombadil's open mic night, rhythmdell (one jam to rule them all), cocktails including the gandalf, bilbo, gimli, legolas, frodo, arwen, merry, pippin, sauron, and gollum Anyone who owns the rights to the Tolkiens work, in print, or on film, or for merchandise, must clearly act if they become aware. It's pretty blatant.

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...2:26am Wed 14 Mar 12

How about The Obit (as in obituary) for a new name. No rights on that.... An obit for the Hobbit? Has a nice ring to it as a headline?

How about The Obit (as in obituary) for a new name. No rights on that....
An obit for the Hobbit? Has a nice ring to it as a headline?Sotonians_lets_pull_together

How about The Obit (as in obituary) for a new name. No rights on that.... An obit for the Hobbit? Has a nice ring to it as a headline?

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...2:27am Wed 14 Mar 12

Could then have it as a grim reaper themed pub ... close enough to the realm of fantasy to bring the old crowd along...

Could then have it as a grim reaper themed pub ... close enough to the realm of fantasy to bring the old crowd along...Sotonians_lets_pull_together

Could then have it as a grim reaper themed pub ... close enough to the realm of fantasy to bring the old crowd along...

Score: 0

Torchie1 says...10:06am Wed 14 Mar 12

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

southy wrote…

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways: 1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service. 2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field. Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage. E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design. Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7

I know there's no point asking you for a reference to this ruling but two firms cannot produce a car with the same name unless they are in agreement. Lotus Cars stopped making the '7' and allowed Caterham Cars to sell their remaining stock before the new Caterham 7 began production. When Graham Nearn bought the rights from Colin Chapman, the name of the car that Lotus produced as the Type 7 changed to Caterham 7. Other companies like Donkervoort and Dax saw legal challenges from Graham Nearn in the early days but it soon became clear that Caterham couldn't stop other companies producing '7' style vehicles. Just to clarify the point, at no time did two companies ever produce and name a vehicle Lotus 7. Before you try to introduce anything else to the argument I should confess that I once worked for Caterham cars which might give me a better insight than you.

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Chas O'Bursledon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]AM[/bold] wrote:
So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other.
The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it.
I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.[/p][/quote]It's not the word that is in question.
It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?[/p][/quote]The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!![/p][/quote]Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.[/p][/quote]I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways:
1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service.
2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field.
Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage.
E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.[/p][/quote]They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design.
Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7[/p][/quote]I know there's no point asking you for a reference to this ruling but two firms cannot produce a car with the same name unless they are in agreement. Lotus Cars stopped making the '7' and allowed Caterham Cars to sell their remaining stock before the new Caterham 7 began production. When Graham Nearn bought the rights from Colin Chapman, the name of the car that Lotus produced as the Type 7 changed to Caterham 7. Other companies like Donkervoort and Dax saw legal challenges from Graham Nearn in the early days but it soon became clear that Caterham couldn't stop other companies producing '7' style vehicles. Just to clarify the point, at no time did two companies ever produce and name a vehicle Lotus 7. Before you try to introduce anything else to the argument I should confess that I once worked for Caterham cars which might give me a better insight than you.Torchie1

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

southy wrote…

Chas O'Bursledon wrote…

Shoong wrote…

AM wrote…

So if a certain type face or style of lettering is used you could be breaching copy right. This means that as the word was already in existence when Tolkien used it, as was the style of lettering/typeface, then Tolkien had possibly already broken copy right with somebody or other. The fact remains the word already existed long before Tolkien used it. I wonder what other words the Americans would like us to pay for before we use them.

It's not the word that is in question. It's called THE HOBBIT with clear indication that the pub uses names & images from copyrighted work. How difficult can it be to understand?

The type face used cannot be the subject of copyright! It is a standard Art Nouveau font. Will they want royalties for us using Times New Roman next? Ludicrous!!!!

Thers all ready been a a court battle over a word, and that was Kelloggs cornflakes, and the other being the engineering firm I think, the ruling was Kelloggs as in Cornflakes could not own the word, but could own the design of the lettering, so the case went against Kelloggs Cornflakes and had to pay up.

I think you'll find that Kelloggs own the trademark in food products. Trademarks operate in two ways: 1. You can trademark the design and style of a word for use as a company name, product or service. 2. You can trademark or word for use within a specific field. Either use of a trademark also comes down to context of the usage. E.g. The was a very long running legal dispute between Apple Corps and Apple Computers over the use of Apple (and using an apple for the logo). The short of it is that the first dispute was resolved by a court ruling that because Apple Corps (a music publisher) was the first registered trademark, Apple computers did not have the re-brand provided they remained in the computer electronic industry. The second dispute came about with the release of the iPod, or more importantly iTunes; which due to iTunes being used for the sale (publishing) of music was in breach of the Apple Corps trademark. This was upheld in court with a substantial payout to Apple Corps in order to continue operating in the music publishing industry.

They own the design of Kelloggs brand name, the Kelloggs word can be use even if you producing cornflakes, but they can not copy brand trade name design. Another example is Lotus 7 two firms producing sports cars with the same name, ruling was both can exciss as there trade band name was different with there own unique way of doing Lotus 7

I know there's no point asking you for a reference to this ruling but two firms cannot produce a car with the same name unless they are in agreement. Lotus Cars stopped making the '7' and allowed Caterham Cars to sell their remaining stock before the new Caterham 7 began production. When Graham Nearn bought the rights from Colin Chapman, the name of the car that Lotus produced as the Type 7 changed to Caterham 7. Other companies like Donkervoort and Dax saw legal challenges from Graham Nearn in the early days but it soon became clear that Caterham couldn't stop other companies producing '7' style vehicles. Just to clarify the point, at no time did two companies ever produce and name a vehicle Lotus 7. Before you try to introduce anything else to the argument I should confess that I once worked for Caterham cars which might give me a better insight than you.

Score: 0

southy says...10:34am Wed 14 Mar 12

Sotonians_lets_pull_ together Aragorn is a boys name as been for 100's years, so no copy right logos is Ancient Greek meaning to go to ground, so no copy right I could go though the whole list and every thing is a lot older than when Tolkien was born. Pictures and ideas how things should look a lot of them came from drawing dating back to Victorians times and embleished. Maps are from real maps of real places. Tolkien done what most great writers have done, taking old storys, myth and other things and brough it all together. Why do you think the film industry can not sue any one over the drawings of the Alien in the film "Alien" because it is a real creature living in the sea, its a parasite creature that feeds on jelly fish in the Indian Ocean.

Sotonians_lets_pull_
together
Aragorn is a boys name as been for 100's years, so no copy right
logos is Ancient Greek meaning to go to ground, so no copy right
I could go though the whole list and every thing is a lot older than when Tolkien was born.
Pictures and ideas how things should look a lot of them came from drawing dating back to Victorians times and embleished.
Maps are from real maps of real places.
Tolkien done what most great writers have done, taking old storys, myth and other things and brough it all together.
Why do you think the film industry can not sue any one over the drawings of the Alien in the film "Alien" because it is a real creature living in the sea, its a parasite creature that feeds on jelly fish in the Indian Ocean.southy

Sotonians_lets_pull_ together Aragorn is a boys name as been for 100's years, so no copy right logos is Ancient Greek meaning to go to ground, so no copy right I could go though the whole list and every thing is a lot older than when Tolkien was born. Pictures and ideas how things should look a lot of them came from drawing dating back to Victorians times and embleished. Maps are from real maps of real places. Tolkien done what most great writers have done, taking old storys, myth and other things and brough it all together. Why do you think the film industry can not sue any one over the drawings of the Alien in the film "Alien" because it is a real creature living in the sea, its a parasite creature that feeds on jelly fish in the Indian Ocean.

Score: 0

southy says...10:41am Wed 14 Mar 12

forest hump wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it. Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Icklelady[/bold] wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.[/p][/quote]The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.[/p][/quote]More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.[/p][/quote]That was the Hobler[/p][/quote]Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it.
Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval timessouthy

forest hump wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it. Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

Score: 0

Huffter says...10:44am Wed 14 Mar 12

Re-name it "The Obit."

Re-name it "The Obit."Huffter

Re-name it "The Obit."

Score: 0

aberis says...10:47am Wed 14 Mar 12

Georgem wrote…

100%HANTSBOY wrote…

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ... and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...

[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote:
Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!![/p][/quote]It's not. The guy's done this before. Google "hungry hobbit cafe", for starters.[/p][/quote]Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ...
and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...aberis

Georgem wrote…

100%HANTSBOY wrote…

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ... and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...10:56am Wed 14 Mar 12

As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue. However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached. There should always be compromise. We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.

As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue.
However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached.
There should always be compromise.
We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.voiceinthecrowd

As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue. However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached. There should always be compromise. We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...10:57am Wed 14 Mar 12

Beer Monster wrote…

It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnished

I doubt that the copyright owner has come across the one in Hythe yet, that's all... if it also uses Lord of the Rings Memorabilia, that would look to be pretty open and shut too? It can easily be found on the web, so I wouldnt be surprised if it gets a letter too: http://www.hythe-new forest.org/hobbits.h tml Hobbits Restaurant & Bar 6b High Street Hythe 02380 848524 This is exactly why the copyright owner needs to act, as otherwise it is a free for all, and it damages their rights

[quote][p][bold]Beer Monster[/bold] wrote:
It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnished[/p][/quote]I doubt that the copyright owner has come across the one in Hythe yet, that's all... if it also uses Lord of the Rings Memorabilia, that would look to be pretty open and shut too?
It can easily be found on the web, so I wouldnt be surprised if it gets a letter too:
http://www.hythe-new
forest.org/hobbits.h
tml
Hobbits Restaurant & Bar
6b High Street
Hythe
02380 848524
This is exactly why the copyright owner needs to act, as otherwise it is a free for all, and it damages their rightsSotonians_lets_pull_together

Beer Monster wrote…

It's certainly more to do with the promotional side - Hobbits pub in Hythe has various LotR memorabilia inside, but draws the line at promos, so has been left untarnished

I doubt that the copyright owner has come across the one in Hythe yet, that's all... if it also uses Lord of the Rings Memorabilia, that would look to be pretty open and shut too? It can easily be found on the web, so I wouldnt be surprised if it gets a letter too: http://www.hythe-new forest.org/hobbits.h tml Hobbits Restaurant & Bar 6b High Street Hythe 02380 848524 This is exactly why the copyright owner needs to act, as otherwise it is a free for all, and it damages their rights

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...11:01am Wed 14 Mar 12

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue. However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached. There should always be compromise. We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.

As a copyright owner it would be your choice. Just as it is someone else's choice to not allow the use where they have the rights. The pub can ask, but I dont see any basis on which it can insist. .

[quote][p][bold]voiceinthecrowd[/bold] wrote:
As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue.
However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached.
There should always be compromise.
We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.[/p][/quote]As a copyright owner it would be your choice. Just as it is someone else's choice to not allow the use where they have the rights.
The pub can ask, but I dont see any basis on which it can insist. .Sotonians_lets_pull_together

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

As a writer if any one used any name I created and produced memorabelia with that on I would quite happily sue. However I would not object to a Pub say using the name and coming to an agreement if approached. There should always be compromise. We must learn to talk this world needs to realise that.

As a copyright owner it would be your choice. Just as it is someone else's choice to not allow the use where they have the rights. The pub can ask, but I dont see any basis on which it can insist. .

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...11:03am Wed 14 Mar 12

aberis wrote…

Georgem wrote…

100%HANTSBOY wrote…

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ... and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...

Exactly, the lawyers for the copyright owners will obviously be doing lots of web searches in the run up to release of a major film. Any businesses out there using the name Hobbit will be found pretty quickly in the next few months I would have thought.

[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]100%HANTSBOY[/bold] wrote:
Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood?
I smell a publicity stunt here!![/p][/quote]It's not. The guy's done this before. Google "hungry hobbit cafe", for starters.[/p][/quote]Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ...
and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...[/p][/quote]Exactly, the lawyers for the copyright owners will obviously be doing lots of web searches in the run up to release of a major film.
Any businesses out there using the name Hobbit will be found pretty quickly in the next few months I would have thought.Sotonians_lets_pull_together

aberis wrote…

Georgem wrote…

100%HANTSBOY wrote…

Who told Hollywood about a small student pub in Portswood? I smell a publicity stunt here!!

Some kind sole on the news report for it on either the Birmingham post or Daily Mail's report on it back in November, very kindly mentioned the existence on this lovely pub ... and believe me, the lawyers dealing with it would have been monitoring all the news reports about the Hungry Hobbit ...

Exactly, the lawyers for the copyright owners will obviously be doing lots of web searches in the run up to release of a major film. Any businesses out there using the name Hobbit will be found pretty quickly in the next few months I would have thought.

Score: 0

voiceinthecrowd says...11:18am Wed 14 Mar 12

The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC Surely the answer is there PROFIT Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen. If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost. Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.

The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC
Surely the answer is there
PROFIT
Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen.
If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost.
Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.voiceinthecrowd

The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC Surely the answer is there PROFIT Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen. If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost. Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.

They could be able to call the pub Gandalf's "Indeed, the names of many of the dwarves, and even the name of Gandalf himself, appears at one point or another in The Elder Edda." http://www.tolkien-o nline.com/tolkien-an d-mythology.html

They could be able to call the pub Gandalf's
"Indeed, the names of many of the dwarves, and even the name of Gandalf himself, appears at one point or another in The Elder Edda."
http://www.tolkien-o
nline.com/tolkien-an
d-mythology.htmlSotonians_lets_pull_together

They could be able to call the pub Gandalf's "Indeed, the names of many of the dwarves, and even the name of Gandalf himself, appears at one point or another in The Elder Edda." http://www.tolkien-o nline.com/tolkien-an d-mythology.html

The trademark laws in the US are different to the UK. If the businesses in the US can demonstrate that they were an established business (trading for 2+ years) prior to the application for the trademarks in 2002 and 2011; they can more often than not continue to trade under that name.

[quote][p][bold]Sotonians_lets_pull_
together[/bold] wrote:
There are others, eg
A restaurant in California:
http://hobbitrestaur
ant.com/page.aspx?pg
id=2
The Hobbit Hotel in Sowerby Bridge
http://www.hobbithot
el.co.uk/
The Hobbit Bistro in Quebec..
http://www.hobbitbis
tro.com/
Hobbit Restaurant in Rivendell, Ocean City, Maryland
The Hobbit Cafe in Houston
http://www.myhobbitc
afe.com/
Grill de Hobbit in Belgium
El Viejo Hobbit, Villa Gesell
Hobbit House, Manila
Hobbit, Darmstadt
The Hobbit, Teignmouth
Cafe Le Hobbit, Quebec City
Hobbit American Grill, Tallahassee
Hobbit Hoagies Westwood, Pensacola
Hobbit House, Vancouver
Rivendell Restaurant and Gardens San Marcos, Texas
It only takes five minutes to do a web search, you can be sure the copyright owners will be doing so.[/p][/quote]The trademark laws in the US are different to the UK. If the businesses in the US can demonstrate that they were an established business (trading for 2+ years) prior to the application for the trademarks in 2002 and 2011; they can more often than not continue to trade under that name.aberis

The trademark laws in the US are different to the UK. If the businesses in the US can demonstrate that they were an established business (trading for 2+ years) prior to the application for the trademarks in 2002 and 2011; they can more often than not continue to trade under that name.

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...11:36am Wed 14 Mar 12

Maybe they could argue that the author intended it to be public property, a mythology for England.... and therefore the copyright should be held to be unenforceable? See this quote: http://www.tolkien-o nline.com/tolkien-an d-mythology.html Tolkien had great interest, as he once wrote to a reader, “in mythological invention, and the mystery of literary creation”. As a scholar of mythology, Tolkien was also quite aware, as he went on to write in the same letter, that “[England] had no stories of its own, not of the quality that I sought, and found in legends of other lands”. Many understood this comment to mean that Tolkien had undertaken the writing of The Lord of the Rings and the rest of his Middle-earth mythology on the basis of creating a “mythology for England”. Perhaps they could argue that the original creation of the word hobbit was not that of Tolkien... that there was prior art evidenced by Tolkien himself... "Hobbits are perhaps JRR Tolkien’s most popular and original creation. As the legend goes, one day in 1928, while grading papers, Tolkien found a student “had mercifully left one of the pages with no writing on it…and I wrote on it: ‘In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.’ Names always generate a story in my mind…I thought I’d better find out what hobbits were like” (Letters of JRR Tolkien pg. 215)" http://www.tolkien-o nline.com/hobbits.ht ml

Maybe they could argue that the author intended it to be public property, a mythology for England.... and therefore the copyright should be held to be unenforceable?
See this quote:
http://www.tolkien-o
nline.com/tolkien-an
d-mythology.html
Tolkien had great interest, as he once wrote to a reader, “in mythological invention, and the mystery of literary creation”. As a scholar of mythology, Tolkien was also quite aware, as he went on to write in the same letter, that “[England] had no stories of its own, not of the quality that I sought, and found in legends of other lands”.
Many understood this comment to mean that Tolkien had undertaken the writing of The Lord of the Rings and the rest of his Middle-earth mythology on the basis of creating a “mythology for England”.
Perhaps they could argue that the original creation of the word hobbit was not that of Tolkien... that there was prior art evidenced by Tolkien himself...
"Hobbits are perhaps JRR Tolkien’s most popular and original creation. As the legend goes, one day in 1928, while grading papers, Tolkien found a student
“had mercifully left one of the pages with no writing on it…and I wrote on it: ‘In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.’ Names always generate a story in my mind…I thought I’d better find out what hobbits were like” (Letters of JRR Tolkien pg. 215)"
http://www.tolkien-o
nline.com/hobbits.ht
mlSotonians_lets_pull_together

Maybe they could argue that the author intended it to be public property, a mythology for England.... and therefore the copyright should be held to be unenforceable? See this quote: http://www.tolkien-o nline.com/tolkien-an d-mythology.html Tolkien had great interest, as he once wrote to a reader, “in mythological invention, and the mystery of literary creation”. As a scholar of mythology, Tolkien was also quite aware, as he went on to write in the same letter, that “[England] had no stories of its own, not of the quality that I sought, and found in legends of other lands”. Many understood this comment to mean that Tolkien had undertaken the writing of The Lord of the Rings and the rest of his Middle-earth mythology on the basis of creating a “mythology for England”. Perhaps they could argue that the original creation of the word hobbit was not that of Tolkien... that there was prior art evidenced by Tolkien himself... "Hobbits are perhaps JRR Tolkien’s most popular and original creation. As the legend goes, one day in 1928, while grading papers, Tolkien found a student “had mercifully left one of the pages with no writing on it…and I wrote on it: ‘In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.’ Names always generate a story in my mind…I thought I’d better find out what hobbits were like” (Letters of JRR Tolkien pg. 215)" http://www.tolkien-o nline.com/hobbits.ht ml

Score: 0

Torchie1 says...11:53am Wed 14 Mar 12

southy wrote…

forest hump wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it. Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.

[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Icklelady[/bold] wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.[/p][/quote]The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.[/p][/quote]More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.[/p][/quote]That was the Hobler[/p][/quote]Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it.
Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times[/p][/quote]The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.Torchie1

southy wrote…

forest hump wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it. Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.

Score: 0

McCalliogStokesGoal! says...1:00pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Crazywolf wrote…

They should just change their name. to something like.. Hollywood Greed

Now that is a GREAT idea!!

[quote][p][bold]Crazywolf[/bold] wrote:
They should just change their name. to something like.. Hollywood Greed[/p][/quote]Now that is a GREAT idea!!McCalliogStokesGoal!

Crazywolf wrote…

They should just change their name. to something like.. Hollywood Greed

Now that is a GREAT idea!!

Score: 0

Sotonians_lets_pull_together says...3:04pm Wed 14 Mar 12

The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859. The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears: 4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.] http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w ord%29

The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859.
The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of
boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies
In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears:
4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.]
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w
ord%29Sotonians_lets_pull_together

The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859. The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears: 4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.] http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w ord%29

Score: 0

bigfella777 says...3:16pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Why dont they just call it "The Halfling" or something or better still close the dump down.

Why dont they just call it "The Halfling" or something or better still close the dump down.bigfella777

Why dont they just call it "The Halfling" or something or better still close the dump down.

Score: 0

southy says...5:18pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Torchie1 wrote…

southy wrote…

forest hump wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it. Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.

There you go a tradesman boils down to the same thing, its oner time do things change like spelling or description.

[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]forest hump[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]aberis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Icklelady[/bold] wrote: This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.[/p][/quote]The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.[/p][/quote]More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.[/p][/quote]That was the Hobler[/p][/quote]Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it.
Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times[/p][/quote]The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.[/p][/quote]There you go a tradesman boils down to the same thing, its oner time do things change like spelling or description.southy

Torchie1 wrote…

southy wrote…

forest hump wrote…

southy wrote…

aberis wrote…

Icklelady wrote…

This is just greed. The Hobbit is a lovely pub which has been running under that name for years. Has he owned the rights longer than The Hobbit has been around? Either way, whatever happens, I won't be seeing this new film.

The Saul Zaentz Company applied for their first trademark for the use of The Hobbit in 2002. There is a restaurant in the Texas called "The Hobbit Cafe" which was established in 1973 and has kept it's name because the use pre-dates any trademark application on the name. The trademark applications were made in 2002 and 2011; don't know if the UK has the same trademark laws.

More or less the same, there also use to be a Hobbit near Lymington.

That was the Hobler

Thats the one forest, I can remember that pub being that name before they change it. Hobler is another form of Hobbit from the medieval times

The Hobler is still called The Hobler and when Pip Stevens bought it as The New Inn he chose a name associated with horses. A Hobler is an old name for someone who looked after horses according to Pip who I assume would have cleared it with you first rather than risk making a mistake.

There you go a tradesman boils down to the same thing, its oner time do things change like spelling or description.

Score: 0

southy says...5:23pm Wed 14 Mar 12

Sotonians_lets_pull_ together wrote…

The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859. The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears: 4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.] http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w ord%29

As a small person, but where did he get the idea from, to find that out its books time and not the internet

[quote][p][bold]Sotonians_lets_pull_
together[/bold] wrote:
The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859.
The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of
boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies
In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears:
4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.]
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w
ord%29[/p][/quote]As a small person, but where did he get the idea from, to find that out its books time and not the internetsouthy

Sotonians_lets_pull_ together wrote…

The only source known today that makes reference to hobbits in any sort of historical context is the Denham Tracts by Michael Aislabie Denham. More specifically, it appears in the Denham Tracts, edited by James Hardy, (London: Folklore Society, 1895), vol. 2, the second part of a two-volume set compiled from Denham's publications between 1846 and 1859. The text contains a long list of sprites and bogies, based on an older list, the Discovery of Witchcraft, dated 1584, with many additions and a few repetitions. The term hobbit is listed in the context of boggleboes, bogies, redmen, portunes, grants, hobbits, hobgoblins, brown-men, cowies, dunnies In the December 2003 Oxford English Dictionary newsletter, in the "Words of Choice" section, the following appears: 4. hobbit — J. R. R. Tolkien modestly claimed not to have coined this word, although the Supplement to the OED credited him with the invention of it in the absence of further evidence. It seems, however, that Tolkien was right to be cautious. It has since turned up in one of those 19th-century folklore journals, in a list of long-forgotten words for fairy-folk or little people. It seems likely that Tolkien, with his interest in folklore, read this and subconsciously registered the name, reviving it many years later in his most famous character. [Editor's note: although revision of the OED's entry for hobbit will of course take this evidence for earlier use into account, it does not yet appear in the online version of the entry.] http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Hobbit_%28w ord%29

As a small person, but where did he get the idea from, to find that out its books time and not the internet

Score: 0

macogan says...4:20am Thu 15 Mar 12

This pub should change it's name and all there promotional material they have broken loads of INTERNATIONAL copyright laws they can't play dum to the fact they have ripped off this book & films they have clearly decided not to pay royalties and this has now come back to bite them on there little hobbit behinds.

This pub should change it's name and all there promotional material they have broken loads of INTERNATIONAL copyright laws they can't play dum to the fact they have ripped off this book & films they have clearly decided not to pay royalties and this has now come back to bite them on there little hobbit behinds.macogan

This pub should change it's name and all there promotional material they have broken loads of INTERNATIONAL copyright laws they can't play dum to the fact they have ripped off this book & films they have clearly decided not to pay royalties and this has now come back to bite them on there little hobbit behinds.

Score: 0

Tirau Dan says...5:10am Thu 15 Mar 12

I live 15mins from the Hobbiton film set which nets the town of Matamata, New Zealand a few bob in tourist bucks. The set tours are expensive and exclusive. the land owners have a shop/cafe and buses from town to the set. No cars are allowed, you can't just call in. No other shops in town have logos fonts or names from the books or films.. Some go close. The Couple that own the set we understand paid a lot of money for the rights and have a lot of constraints to live by. Exclusivity is everything. Make one exception and thousands will pop up. The answer here is in the origin of the hobbit as a fairy tale creature in common use. The use of the fonts names and everything else are controlled by the copyright owner. I do believe in copyright ownership and need to ask if the pub asked the Tolkien trust before setting up? That said.. Newline, Saul Zaentz through Tolkien Enterprises etc have a rep for being heavy handed.. They've been sued by The Tolkien Trust and by Peter Jackson over ripping them off re payments. I'd love it if it turned out that they had no right to exclusive use of the Hobbits or the fonts or other creatures written about. Steven Fry who is in The Hobbit has now come out stating support for the pub and expressed his shame at this case. Good on him. Maybe we could start a Harry Potters Magical Emporium chain in NZ. The books were not very original but ppl like em.

I live 15mins from the Hobbiton film set which nets the town of Matamata, New Zealand a few bob in tourist bucks. The set tours are expensive and exclusive. the land owners have a shop/cafe and buses from town to the set. No cars are allowed, you can't just call in. No other shops in town have logos fonts or names from the books or films.. Some go close. The Couple that own the set we understand paid a lot of money for the rights and have a lot of constraints to live by. Exclusivity is everything. Make one exception and thousands will pop up.
The answer here is in the origin of the hobbit as a fairy tale creature in common use. The use of the fonts names and everything else are controlled by the copyright owner.
I do believe in copyright ownership and need to ask if the pub asked the Tolkien trust before setting up?
That said.. Newline, Saul Zaentz through Tolkien Enterprises etc have a rep for being heavy handed.. They've been sued by The Tolkien Trust and by Peter Jackson over ripping them off re payments.
I'd love it if it turned out that they had no right to exclusive use of the Hobbits or the fonts or other creatures written about.
Steven Fry who is in The Hobbit has now come out stating support for the pub and expressed his shame at this case. Good on him.
Maybe we could start a Harry Potters Magical Emporium chain in NZ. The books were not very original but ppl like em.Tirau Dan

I live 15mins from the Hobbiton film set which nets the town of Matamata, New Zealand a few bob in tourist bucks. The set tours are expensive and exclusive. the land owners have a shop/cafe and buses from town to the set. No cars are allowed, you can't just call in. No other shops in town have logos fonts or names from the books or films.. Some go close. The Couple that own the set we understand paid a lot of money for the rights and have a lot of constraints to live by. Exclusivity is everything. Make one exception and thousands will pop up. The answer here is in the origin of the hobbit as a fairy tale creature in common use. The use of the fonts names and everything else are controlled by the copyright owner. I do believe in copyright ownership and need to ask if the pub asked the Tolkien trust before setting up? That said.. Newline, Saul Zaentz through Tolkien Enterprises etc have a rep for being heavy handed.. They've been sued by The Tolkien Trust and by Peter Jackson over ripping them off re payments. I'd love it if it turned out that they had no right to exclusive use of the Hobbits or the fonts or other creatures written about. Steven Fry who is in The Hobbit has now come out stating support for the pub and expressed his shame at this case. Good on him. Maybe we could start a Harry Potters Magical Emporium chain in NZ. The books were not very original but ppl like em.

Score: 0

City Saint says...5:51am Thu 15 Mar 12

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC Surely the answer is there PROFIT Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen. If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost. Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.

I knew the management well back in the early 90s. The pub was named when lord of the rings was still just a popular book among the jaded generations, and certainly not a billion dollar movie business. Tolkien was, and still is, an anti-hero for generations of slightly nerdy students and young adults. So the name of the pub was a knowing wink in the direction of people who like reading extremely long and involved fictionalized histories of orcs, halflings and so on. Frankly, when it was named, it was as much about keeping out Townies (now there's a word for you from the Eighties) and inviting in the uncool, and often unwashed, students living in beavois valley and portswood. It was not a name chosen with a cynical view to making lots of money off the back of the rather brilliant and certainly successful Hollywood films.

[quote][p][bold]voiceinthecrowd[/bold] wrote:
The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC
Surely the answer is there
PROFIT
Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen.
If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost.
Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.[/p][/quote]I knew the management well back in the early 90s. The pub was named when lord of the rings was still just a popular book among the jaded generations, and certainly not a billion dollar movie business. Tolkien was, and still is, an anti-hero for generations of slightly nerdy students and young adults. So the name of the pub was a knowing wink in the direction of people who like reading extremely long and involved fictionalized histories of orcs, halflings and so on. Frankly, when it was named, it was as much about keeping out Townies (now there's a word for you from the Eighties) and inviting in the uncool, and often unwashed, students living in beavois valley and portswood. It was not a name chosen with a cynical view to making lots of money off the back of the rather brilliant and certainly successful Hollywood films.City Saint

voiceinthecrowd wrote…

The Question really comes down to WHY DID PUB CHOOSE THAT NAME AND SELL T SHIRTS ETC Surely the answer is there PROFIT Not that I am blaming them for trying, but what did they expect would happen. If you let one get away with it then its a FREE FOR ALL and the hard work and cash sunk into film, book, art etc is lost. Just imagine say you found at the end of the week you had a deduction in your wages you would go mad.

I knew the management well back in the early 90s. The pub was named when lord of the rings was still just a popular book among the jaded generations, and certainly not a billion dollar movie business. Tolkien was, and still is, an anti-hero for generations of slightly nerdy students and young adults. So the name of the pub was a knowing wink in the direction of people who like reading extremely long and involved fictionalized histories of orcs, halflings and so on. Frankly, when it was named, it was as much about keeping out Townies (now there's a word for you from the Eighties) and inviting in the uncool, and often unwashed, students living in beavois valley and portswood. It was not a name chosen with a cynical view to making lots of money off the back of the rather brilliant and certainly successful Hollywood films.

Score: 0

philpeel says...10:39am Thu 15 Mar 12

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

Actually the name "The Hobbit" was registered as a trademark but only fairly recently http://www.ipo.gov.u k/domestic?domesticn um=2462911 more info on the background to this story on http://www.philpeel. com/2012/03/hollywoo d-v-local-hobbit-pub -the-background/

[quote][p][bold]sherinsul[/bold] wrote:
how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous[/p][/quote]Actually the name "The Hobbit" was registered as a trademark but only fairly recently http://www.ipo.gov.u
k/domestic?domesticn
um=2462911
more info on the background to this story on http://www.philpeel.
com/2012/03/hollywoo
d-v-local-hobbit-pub
-the-background/philpeel

sherinsul wrote…

how can the the pub change its name, the pub was here LONG before 'JRR Tolkeins' films ever were made.Its ridiculous

Actually the name "The Hobbit" was registered as a trademark but only fairly recently http://www.ipo.gov.u k/domestic?domesticn um=2462911 more info on the background to this story on http://www.philpeel. com/2012/03/hollywoo d-v-local-hobbit-pub -the-background/

Score: 0

ramptonfromsouthampton says...12:59pm Thu 15 Mar 12

So many tw*ts posting here in support of the Hollywood company's stance. So what if the pub has chosen a theme that attracts customers to use the place. Its not exactly threatening the success of the film is it? For those spiteful types here who have either got a grudge to bear or are just being pompous bombastic know-it-alls, haven't you got something better to do with your time? Some of you could be making better use of the energy you are wasting here.

So many tw*ts posting here in support of the Hollywood company's stance. So what if the pub has chosen a theme that attracts customers to use the place. Its not exactly threatening the success of the film is it? For those spiteful types here who have either got a grudge to bear or are just being pompous bombastic know-it-alls, haven't you got something better to do with your time? Some of you could be making better use of the energy you are wasting here.ramptonfromsouthampton

So many tw*ts posting here in support of the Hollywood company's stance. So what if the pub has chosen a theme that attracts customers to use the place. Its not exactly threatening the success of the film is it? For those spiteful types here who have either got a grudge to bear or are just being pompous bombastic know-it-alls, haven't you got something better to do with your time? Some of you could be making better use of the energy you are wasting here.

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standardards Organisations's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a compaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here